The "GPDO Part 3 Class O - Prior Approval Appeal Decisions" document has been updated to include 7 additional appeal decisions relating to office-to-residential conversions, for which the conclusions are as follows:

February 2018 - Code P3CO-254 (appeal dismissed):

• This appeal decision was assessed against the issues specified by paragraph O.2 as follows:
  - “transport and highways impacts” = no assessment.
  - “contamination risks” = no assessment.
  - “flooding risks” = no assessment.
  - “impacts of noise” = no assessment.
• This appeal decision provides an example of where it was concluded that the lawful use of the site (i.e. the building and any land within its curtilage) is not B1(a). [Note: In other words, the proposed development would not comply with the combination of article 3(5) of the GPDO and the heading of Part 3 Class O].
  [Quote: “From my site visit I was able to see at first floor level the existing staff room shown on the submitted plans is in fact a large living room with dining area, the individual offices are bedrooms. The mezzanine storage area contains gymnasium equipment with mats on the floor and the area below is being used for clothes drying and storage of other equipment including bicycles. The office indicated at the first floor is now a kitchen. The large ground floor store room contains 3 vehicles and equipment such as a cement mixer and vehicle parts. The smaller storage room includes racks with various items on them and other apparatus elsewhere in the room such as sports and gardening equipment. Given this activity, as a matter of fact and degree, there is not an ongoing use within Use Class B1(a). Furthermore, it is not clear, on the evidence that a previous office use could now be lawfully reinstated. Moreover, the commencement of residential use constitutes a failure to adhere to the prior approval pre-commencement conditions within paragraph W of Schedule 2, Part 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015, as amended.”].
• This appeal decision provides an example of where the Inspector concluded that the development was begun before the developer successfully completed the prior approval process.
  [Quote: “From my site visit I was able to see at first floor level the existing staff room shown on the submitted plans is in fact a large living room with dining area, the individual offices are bedrooms. The mezzanine storage area contains gymnasium equipment with mats on the floor and the area below is being used for clothes drying and storage of other equipment including bicycles. The office indicated at the first floor is now a kitchen. The large ground floor store room contains 3 vehicles and equipment such as a cement mixer and vehicle parts. The smaller storage room includes racks with various items on them and other apparatus elsewhere in the room such as sports and gardening equipment. Given this activity, as a matter of fact and degree, there is not an ongoing use within Use Class B1(a). Furthermore, it is not clear, on the evidence that a previous office use could now be lawfully reinstated. Moreover, the commencement of residential use constitutes a failure to adhere to the prior approval pre-commencement conditions within paragraph W of Schedule 2, Part 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015, as amended.”].

February 2018 - Code P3CO-253 (appeal dismissed):

• This appeal decision was assessed against the issues specified by paragraph O.2 as follows:
  - “transport and highways impacts” = no assessment.
  - “contamination risks” = no assessment.
  - “flooding risks” = no assessment.
  - “impacts of noise” = no assessment.
• This appeal decision provides an example of where it was concluded that the lawful use of the site (i.e. the building and any land within its curtilage) is not B1(a). [Note: In other words, the proposed development would not comply with the combination of article 3(5) of the GPDO and the heading of Part 3 Class O].
  [Quote: “On the evidence, it is not clear that prior to June 2016, during the occupation by Dince Hill (Holdings) Ltd (as well as on 29 May 2013) whether there was a primary use within Use Class B1(a) taking place, whether the office use was a part of a mixed use of the overall planning unit, or whether the offices were the primary use with the workshop and storage being ancillary to it. Therefore in relation to the main issue, and as a matter of fact and degree, the proposal would not constitute permitted development under the provisions of Class O.”].
• This appeal decision provides an example of where it was concluded that the building was not used as B1(a) on 29/05/2013 or (if not in use on that date) when it was last in use. [Note: In other words, the proposed development would not comply with O.1(b)].
  [Quote: “On the evidence, it is not clear that prior to June 2016, during the occupation by Dince Hill (Holdings) Ltd (as well as on 29 May 2013) whether there was a primary use within Use Class B1(a) taking place, whether the office use was a part of a mixed use of the overall planning unit, or whether the offices were the primary use with the workshop and storage being ancillary to it. Therefore in relation to the main issue, and as a matter of fact and degree, the proposal would not constitute permitted development under the provisions of Class O.”].

February 2018 - Code P3CO-252 (appeal allowed):

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

February 2018 - Code P3CO-251 (appeal allowed):

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

February 2018 - Code P3CO-250 (appeal allowed):

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

February 2018 - Code P3CO-249 (appeal dismissed):

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

February 2018 - Code P3CO-248 (appeal allowed):

• [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 "GPDO Part 3 Class O - Prior Approval Appeal Decisions" document. As a member of the Planning Jungle website, you can view the decision notices for all of the appeals on the website 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.
• The above document also includes 33 "Potential fallback position" appeals, which are NOT summarised (only listed).