Could Opening Licence grant and Installation of a commercial establishment on the premises on the ground floor of a building under construction in phase structure that is paralyzed?
Pere-Joan Torrent Riberto. Advocate
If we apply rigorous urban planning regulations, the answer must be negative, for the following reasons. A building structure being paralyzed, has the license expired, in all likelihood. You do not say how long it has been paralyzed, or which is the term under license or under the rules in your community had the developer to complete the works. It is true that the license expiration does not occur automatically, but the City Council must explicitly declare, after hearing the licensee. But it is very probable that the lapse has already occurred. And therefore, the City Council should instruct the record to declare license expiration. And in a building only to the structure, and without planning permission, and no final certificate of work, it seems possible to grant a license for construction and installation of a commercial establishment in the basement, and then grant the license to open such an establishment.
Against this position I regard as the most legally and safely on the other hand for the municipal architect for the municipality, other doctrine would enable economic activity to this employer. That the employer submit a draft work to end completely the low and turn them into a commercial establishment, the building permit process in the basement of this building, and grant a license, regardless of whether the overall structure of the building without a license, has expired since it was granted in his day. For me personally it does not seem quite right this second option, and therefore I would not advise it. Indeed
License
a month ago has expired. However what we have now is another project to equip the basement of the building. Would it be possible to grant an extension to the original license of the building? If so, could grant permission for starting activities with a final completion certificate part of the initial license and a Certificate of Completion of the refurbishment of the premises, being that in this case the work would resume, although not would be completed at the time of granting the license to open?
Pere-Joan Torrent Riberto. Advocate
1. I can not comment on whether or not to grant an extension of planning permission to build the building, because it depends on the regional legislation, I know. But in many autonomous regions that would not be possible, because they can not grant extensions of the licenses if they are not requested before the license expires. In any case, if a license can not be extended, then that is not serious because you can request a new one. It's just a problem of having to pay back the fee for granting license. The only serious situation that involves a revocation of the license, is whether this lapse of time, planning had been altered so that RICE impossible to grant a new license to the original project. If this has not happened, the revocation of a license is a simple matter of economics, relatively important.
2. As for the rest of the questions, I repeat what I have written the first response. If done all as you explain, at least there is a reasonable appearance of legality. But I think it is still dangerous to grant a partial building permit and a license to operate in a building structure with expired license, ie without a license in regard to the whole building. If one day an accident occurred in this place, attributable or not the state of the abandoned structure, I do not like to be the architect who has made a favorable report on the local license of the bass. And I do not like to defend the City against the probable liability claims that could be brought against him.
3. One difference would be if the building works in general continue to license extended or a new license.
Pere-Joan Torrent Riberto. Advocate
If we apply rigorous urban planning regulations, the answer must be negative, for the following reasons. A building structure being paralyzed, has the license expired, in all likelihood. You do not say how long it has been paralyzed, or which is the term under license or under the rules in your community had the developer to complete the works. It is true that the license expiration does not occur automatically, but the City Council must explicitly declare, after hearing the licensee. But it is very probable that the lapse has already occurred. And therefore, the City Council should instruct the record to declare license expiration. And in a building only to the structure, and without planning permission, and no final certificate of work, it seems possible to grant a license for construction and installation of a commercial establishment in the basement, and then grant the license to open such an establishment.
Against this position I regard as the most legally and safely on the other hand for the municipal architect for the municipality, other doctrine would enable economic activity to this employer. That the employer submit a draft work to end completely the low and turn them into a commercial establishment, the building permit process in the basement of this building, and grant a license, regardless of whether the overall structure of the building without a license, has expired since it was granted in his day. For me personally it does not seem quite right this second option, and therefore I would not advise it. Indeed
License
a month ago has expired. However what we have now is another project to equip the basement of the building. Would it be possible to grant an extension to the original license of the building? If so, could grant permission for starting activities with a final completion certificate part of the initial license and a Certificate of Completion of the refurbishment of the premises, being that in this case the work would resume, although not would be completed at the time of granting the license to open?
Pere-Joan Torrent Riberto. Advocate
1. I can not comment on whether or not to grant an extension of planning permission to build the building, because it depends on the regional legislation, I know. But in many autonomous regions that would not be possible, because they can not grant extensions of the licenses if they are not requested before the license expires. In any case, if a license can not be extended, then that is not serious because you can request a new one. It's just a problem of having to pay back the fee for granting license. The only serious situation that involves a revocation of the license, is whether this lapse of time, planning had been altered so that RICE impossible to grant a new license to the original project. If this has not happened, the revocation of a license is a simple matter of economics, relatively important.
2. As for the rest of the questions, I repeat what I have written the first response. If done all as you explain, at least there is a reasonable appearance of legality. But I think it is still dangerous to grant a partial building permit and a license to operate in a building structure with expired license, ie without a license in regard to the whole building. If one day an accident occurred in this place, attributable or not the state of the abandoned structure, I do not like to be the architect who has made a favorable report on the local license of the bass. And I do not like to defend the City against the probable liability claims that could be brought against him.
3. One difference would be if the building works in general continue to license extended or a new license.
0 comments:
Post a Comment