Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
23/00399/LAW Page 1 of 3
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Application No. : 23/00399/LAW Applicant : Mr James Turpin Proposal : Certificate of lawful development for the installation of replacement roof tiles Site Address : 5 Laureston Terrace Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 5DH
Principal Planner: Mr Chris Balmer Photo Taken : Site Visit : Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Certificate of Lawful Use/Devel Approved Date of Recommendation: 03.04.2023 __
Conditions and Notes for Approval
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
C 1. There is sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the roof to the main dwelling was replaced more than 4 years ago for a period exceeding four years, prior to 2019, and as such, the Department may not issue an enforcement notice due to the provisions of Town and Country Planning Act 1999 Schedule 4 Part 1 paragraph 3(a).
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This decision relates to the location and site plans and photographs and other supporting information all received on 28.03.2023.
__
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
N/A __
Officer’s Report
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 The application seeks a Certificate of lawful development for the replacement of roof tiles to the dwelling. The application seeking the Certificate of Lawfulness was submitted on 28.03.2023. This means the relevant 4 years for consideration is from 28.03.2019.
==== PAGE 2 ====
23/00399/LAW Page 2 of 3
1.2 In accordance with the provisions of Schedule 4, Part 1, paragraph 3 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 ("the Act"), a development carried out in breach of planning control shall become immune from enforcement action after a certain period of time, provided that formal enforcement action has not already been taken. The relevant time periods are set out below: a) in respect of a breach of planning control consisting of the carrying out without planning approval of building, engineering, mining or other operations in, on, over or under land, after the end of the period of 4 years beginning with the date on which the operations were substantially completed; b) in respect of a breach of planning control consisting of the change of use of any building to use as a single dwelling house, after the end of the period of 4 years beginning with the date of the breach; c) in respect of any other breach of planning control, after the end of the period of 10 years beginning with the date of the breach.
1.3 Section 24 of the Act makes provision for the submission and issuing of a Certificate of Lawfulness to establish the lawfulness of a breach of planning control.
1.4 An application for a Certificate of Lawfulness is determined on the basis of fact. Unlike an application for planning approval, it is not concerned with land-use planning considerations or the impacts of the development upon the public realm.
1.5 The principal test is whether, on the balance of probabilities, the breach of planning control has occurred continuously for the given period. The burden of proof rests with the applicant and their evidence must be both precise and unambiguous. If the Planning Authority has no evidence of its own to contradict that provided by the applicant, then provided that the applicant's evidence is sufficiently precise and unambiguous, a Certificate of Lawfulness may be issued. It is not usually necessary for the Planning Authority to corroborate the applicant's evidence.
2.0 THE APPLICATION SITE 2.1 The application site is the curtilage of 5 Laureston Terrace, Douglas which is a Victorian terraced property located on the eastern side of Ballaquayle Road.
3.0 THE PROPOSAL 3.1 The planning application seeks approval for the Certificate of Lawful Development for the installation of replacement roof tiles.
4.0 PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 There are no previous planning applications which are considered relevant in the assessment and determination of this application.
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 No comments received at the time of writing this report.
6.0 ASSESSMENT / SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE PROVIDED 6.1 In terms of whether the rear wall has been demolished for more than 4 years from the date of submission the Department considers that it has. Tthe evidence supplied by the applicants, while not substantial in size, does suggest that the rear wall has not been in place for a number of decades and certainly more than 4 years. The information includes: o A letter from previous, previous owner confirming works to the roof were completed prior to 2018; o Aerial photograph from 2006 (further Government Aerial photographs demonstrate the roof appeared to change between the 2015 and 2018 aerial photograph); and o Photographs showing the area in question today, albeit dirty in lead work etc indicates it doesn't appear new.
==== PAGE 3 ====
23/00399/LAW Page 3 of 3
6.2 The rear wall has clearly been demolished since 2019 when the aerial photography was undertaken.
7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 On the balance of probabilities, the evidence sufficiently demonstrates that the roof to the main dwelling was replaced more than 4 years ago and as such, the Department may not issue an enforcement notice due to the provisions of Town and Country Planning Act 1999 Schedule 4 Part 1 paragraph 3(a) and it is recommended that a Certificate of Lawful Development is granted.
8.0 RECOMMENDATION 8.1 It is recommended that the application for a Certificate of Lawfulness is agreed.
9.0 INTERESTED PARTY STATUS 9.1 As the application is for a CLU this is not required to be assessed. __
I can confirm that this decision has been made by a Principal Planner in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status.
Decision Made : Certificate of Lawful Use/Devel Approved
Date: 03.04.2023
Determining officer Signed : J SINGLETON
Jason Singleton
Principal Planner
Customer note
This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the file copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online services/customers and archive records.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal