“Part 3 Class O of the GPDO – Appeal Decisions” – 3 additional appeal decisions (total = 275) …

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

September 2018 - Code P3CO-275 (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 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)].
    [Note: The Inspector rejected an application for costs against the Council in relation to this issue].
    [Quote: “Despite the above application the appellant now argues that the office is not ancillary. Nevertheless, the appeal building is still used for the administration and management of [GL] and it is located at the premises of [GL]; albeit there is another site in Hertfordshire. Whilst the appeal building may be used to undertake the administrative duties for both sites, I still consider there is a clear functional relationship between the use of the appeal building and [GL] at [the wider site]. I therefore find that the office use of the appeal building is ancillary to the main use of the site, which is horticulture. It does not, therefore, have a B1(a) use.”].
  • The phrase “used for a use falling within Class B1(a) (offices)” within O.1(b) refers to the lawful use of the building (i.e. rather than the actual use of the building). (*)
    [Note: The Inspector rejected an application for costs against the Council in relation to this issue].
    [Quote: “In any event, even if I were to conclude that the appeal building was not ancillary and had, instead, been used for B1(a) office use as a separate planning unit, I am not satisfied on the evidence before me that this use is lawful. A change of use from an office to a dwellinghouse would only be permitted under Class O if the building in question was lawfully used as an office at the relevant date.”].

September 2018 - Code P3CO-274 (appeal dismissed):

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

September 2018 - Code P3CO-273 (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 Part 3 Class O of the GPDO - 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.
  • The above document also includes 33 "Potential fallback position" appeals, which are NOT summarised (only listed).