“Part 1 of the GPDO – GENERAL Appeal Decisions” – 10 additional appeal decisions (total = 848) …

The Part 1 of the GPDO - GENERAL Appeal Decisions document has been updated to include 10 additional appeal decisions relating to householder permitted development legislation, for which the conclusions are as follows:

October 2016 - Code a00742 (appeal dismissed):

  • Where there’s an existing (non-original) extension with a roof that joins onto the roof of the main house, then this existing extension does reduce the volume (i.e. “cubic content”) that remains under B.1(d) for further extensions.
  • It is not possible to increase the volume (i.e. “cubic content”) that’s available under B.1(d) for a roof extension by removing part of the original roof.
    [Note: The works include roof extension (approx 56m3) and the removal of part of the original roof to the rear (approx 6m3)].

September 2016 - Code a00741 (appeal allowed):

  • Where the width of a property varies, the “width of the original dwellinghouse” should be calculated at its widest point.

September 2016 - Code a00740 (appeal dismissed):

  • Where a property has a secondary roof that’s slightly lower than the main roof, then an extension on top of this secondary roof should be assessed against Class B (i.e. rather than Class A). (*)
    [Note: Roof of original two-storey rear projection on two-storey house].
  • This appeal decision provides an example of where it was concluded that a particular roof extension would not constitute “an enlargement which joins the original roof to the roof of a rear or side extension” for the purposes of B.2(b).
    [Note: Proposed rear dormer would join the main rear roof onto the pitched roof of the original two-storey rear projection].
  • For the purposes of the post-06/04/2014 versions of B.2(b), where a property has an original rear projection with a side-facing pitched roof, for which the ridge-line is at a (slightly) lower level than the eaves of the main rear roof, then B.2(b) would not allow a roof extension that extends from the main rear roof onto the side roof of the original rear projection. [Note: The roof extension, for the whole of its width, would extend across the line of the original rear eaves]. (*)
    [Note: Ridge-line is actually at the same level as the eaves of the main rear roof].

September 2016 - Code a00739 (appeal dismissed):

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

September 2016 - Code a00738 (2 x appeal allowed):

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

September 2016 - Code a00737 (appeal dismissed):

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

September 2016 - Code a00736 (split decision):

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

September 2016 - Code a00735 (appeal allowed):

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

September 2016 - Code a00734 (appeal allowed):

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

September 2016 - Code a00733 (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.