“Part 1 of the GPDO – Appeal Decision Summaries” – 25 additional appeal decisions (total = 287) …

The Part 1 of the GPDO - GENERAL Appeal Decisions document has been updated to include 25 additional appeal decisions relating to householder permitted development legislation, for which the conclusions are as follows:

November 2011 - Code a00287 (appeal allowed):

  • The term “highway” does apply to a public footpath.
  • This appeal decision provides an example of the types of factors that should be taken into consideration when determining which elevation is “the principal elevation”.
  • An elevation that’s opposite the “front” of the property must be “the rear wall”. (*)
  • Class G can be used concurrently with other Classes. (*)
  • For example, a proposed extension under Class A can include the installation or alteration of a chimney under Class G. (*)

November 2011 - Code a00286 (appeal dismissed):

  • For a property with a rectangular footprint, the combination of A.1(j) and A.1(f)/A.1(g)/A.1(h) would not allow an “L”-shaped extension that covers the original side wall and then wraps-around the corner to cover the original rear wall. This is because the restriction of A.1(j) against having “a width greater than half the width of the original dwellinghouse” would apply to the entire extension (i.e. not only to that part of the extension that extends beyond the original side wall). (*)
  • Furthermore, the above conclusion still applies even if part of the extension is existing and part of the extension is proposed. (*)
  • Where part of an extension would extend beyond an original side wall, the restrictions of A.1(j) would apply to the entire extension (i.e. not only to that part of the extension that extends beyond the original side wall). (*)
  • For example, where part of an extension would extend beyond an original side wall, the overall width of the (entire) extension can not be “greater than half the width of the original dwellinghouse”, even if the part of the extension that extends beyond the original side wall would not do so by more than half the width of the house. (*)
  • Where a proposed extension would be attached to an existing extension, then the phrase “the enlarged part of the dwellinghouse” applies to the combined structure. [Note: In other words, the combined structure should be assessed against those limitations and conditions of Class A that apply to the enlarged part of the dwellinghouse]. (*)

November 2011 - Code a00285 (appeal dismissed):

  • Where part of an extension would be within 2m of a boundary, the 3m eaves height limit of A.1(i) would apply to the entire extension (i.e. not only to that part of the extension that’s within 2m of the boundary). (*)

October 2011 - Code a00284 (appeal allowed):

  • For a property with a rectangular footprint, the combination of A.1(j) and A.1(f)/A.1(g)/A.1(h) would allow an “l”-shaped extension that covers the original side wall and then projects directly rearward up to 3m/4m/6m/8m beyond the line of the original rear wall (i.e. without wrapping-around the corner to cover the original rear wall).
  • In the first of the above diagrams, “Extension A” would be subject to the “extend beyond” type restrictions in relation to “Wall 1”. [Note: The diagrams are viewable within the “Extend beyond” topic of this document]. (*)

October 2011 - Code a00283 (appeal allowed):

  • It is possible under Part 1 of the GPDO for two neighbouring properties to each concurrently erect a structure that adjoins the other structure across the boundary.
  • This appeal decision provides an example of where the submitted drawings contained a mixture of specific and non-specific information about materials and the Inspector concluded that the proposed development would comply with the materials condition.

October 2011 - Code a00282 (appeal dismissed):

  • [Note: To view these conclusions, please log onto the website as a member].

October 2011 - Code a00281 (appeal allowed):

  • [Note: To view these conclusions, please log onto the website as a member].

October 2011 - Code a00280 (appeal allowed):

  • [Note: To view these conclusions, please log onto the website as a member].

October 2011 - Code a00279 (appeal allowed):

  • [Note: To view these conclusions, please log onto the website as a member].

October 2011 - Code a00278 (appeal allowed):

  • [Note: To view these conclusions, please log onto the website as a member].

October 2011 - Code a00277 (appeal allowed):

  • [Note: To view these conclusions, please log onto the website as a member].

September 2011 - Code a00276 (appeal dismissed):

  • [Note: To view these conclusions, please log onto the website as a member].

September 2011 - Code a00275 (appeal dismissed):

  • [Note: To view these conclusions, please log onto the website as a member].

August 2011 - Code a00274 (appeal dismissed):

  • [Note: To view these conclusions, please log onto the website as a member].

August 2011 - Code a00273 (appeal dismissed):

  • [Note: To view these conclusions, please log onto the website as a member].

August 2011 - Code a00272 (appeal dismissed):

  • [Note: To view these conclusions, please log onto the website as a member].

August 2011 - Code a00271 (appeal dismissed):

  • [Note: To view these conclusions, please log onto the website as a member].

August 2011 - Code a00270 (appeal dismissed):

  • [Note: To view these conclusions, please log onto the website as a member].

August 2011 - Code a00269 (appeal dismissed):

  • [Note: To view these conclusions, please log onto the website as a member].

August 2011 - Code a00268 (appeal allowed):

  • [Note: To view these conclusions, please log onto the website as a member].

July 2011 - Code a00267 (appeal allowed):

  • [Note: To view these conclusions, please log onto the website as a member].

July 2011 - Code a00266 (appeal allowed):

  • [Note: To view these conclusions, please log onto the website as a member].

August 2011 - Code a00265 (appeal dismissed):

  • [Note: To view these conclusions, please log onto the website as a member].

July 2011 - Code a00264 (appeal allowed):

  • [Note: To view these conclusions, please log onto the website as a member].

July 2011 - Code a00263 (appeal dismissed):

  • [Note: To view these conclusions, please log onto the website as a member].

Notes:

  • To view the conclusions, full summaries, and decision notices for any of the above appeals, please view the Part 1 of the GPDO - GENERAL Appeal Decisions document. As a member of the Planning Jungle website, you can view the decision notices for all of the appeals within the above document for no extra cost.
  • Any of the above conclusions marked with a "(*)" contradict other appeal decisions. The "Reference Section" within the above document indicates how many appeals have supported and contradicted each particular conclusion.