Agenda item

SB/21/00221/PLD Green Acre, Inlands Road, Nutbourne (10.20 approximate start time)


Proposed lawful development certificate for the use of land for agricultural purposes.





Mr Mew presented the item to the Committee. Mr Mew informed Member’s that this was a Certificate for Lawful Development and not an application seeking planning permission. He explained that a Certificate for Lawful Development is a mechanism by which the applicant can ask the planning authority whether planning permission is required or not. There are some distinct differences between a Certificate for Lawful Development and a planning application, the most significant being that Planning Policies and planning merits are not considerations that can be taken into account when assessing whether a certificate is lawful or not. Mr Mew referred to section 55 of the Town and Country Planning Act which set out what was classified as development and what was not classified as development.


The Chairman invited Ms Golding to address the Committee, and provide clarification over what a Certificate of Lawful Development is and how it differs from a planning application. Ms Golding reiterated what Mr Mew had said, and reminded the Committee that Planning Policies and planning merits could not be considered in the determination. In addition what the land had previously been used for or what it had had permission for was not relevant.


Ms Golding informed the Committee that in its simplest form a Certificate of Lawful Development was an interpretation of law, and members, in their determination had to decide whether the request was legal or not.


The Committee received the following speakers;

Mrs Amanda Tait – Parish Representative

Mrs Ceri Stunt – Supporter

Miss Eleanor White – Agent

Mr Jonathan Brown – CDC Member


Officers responded to Members’ comments and questions as follows;


Mr Whitty acknowledged the concerns highlighted by both members’ and speakers, but stressed that this was not a planning application and as such planning policies were not relevant in the determination of the application. He explained that agricultural use is not development and therefore requires no planning permission.


Mr Whitty confirmed that there were no gypsy and travellers living on the site and that the previous site owners had sold the site to the neighbouring developer. He explained that the issuing of a certificate in itself does not change the use of the land and it could still be used as a Gypsy and Traveller site. However, if the use subject of the certificate was to be implemented and the land was to revert to agriculture this would become the lawful use of the land.


Ms Golding confirmed that there is no time limit attached to a Certificate of Lawful Development.


In response to concerns raised over the applicant’s future intention to build house on the site, Ms Golding confirmed that such a development would require planning permission and an application would have to be made to the planning authority for consideration.


Ms Golding explained that no conditions can be imposed on a Lawful Development Certificate.


With regard to the use of the land as a Gypsy and Traveller site, Ms Golding explained that if the land did not revert to agriculture this permission is still extant, however, if the land did change to agriculture than a further permission would be required to change the land from agriculture to any other use.


In a vote Members agreed the recommendation to permit.


Permit, subject to conditions and informatives listed in the report.


Members took a ten minute break


Supporting documents: