“Part 1 of the GPDO – GENERAL Appeal Decisions” – 6 additional appeal decisions (total = 1,122) …

The Part 1 of the GPDO - GENERAL Appeal Decisions document has been updated to include 6 additional appeal decisions relating to householder permitted development legislation, for which the conclusions are as follows:

January 2019 - Code a01016 (appeal dismissed):

  • This appeal decision provides an example of where it was concluded that a particular structure does constitute a “verandah, balcony or raised platform”. [Note: In other words, such a structure is prevented by the limitations about balconies (i.e. A.1(k), B.1(e), and E.1(h))].
    [Conclusion: A flat surface on one side of an outbuilding, with height approx 0.2m and area (approx) 3.6m x 0.45m = 1.6m2, and covered by the 0.45m overhang of the roof, is a “verandah” and a “platform” (albeit not high enough to be a “raised platform”)].

January 2019 - Code a01015 (appeal dismissed):

  • For the purposes of the post-15/04/2015 version(s) of Part 1 of the GPDO, this appeal decision provides an example of where it was concluded that a particular way or piece of land is a “highway”.
    [Note: The way (or piece of land) is a footpath (cul-de-sac) that provides pedestrian access to the front of properties.  The Inspector concludes that the footpath is a “highway” regardless of “Whether it is described as a public right of way or a private way”].
  • For the purposes of the post-15/04/2015 version(s) of Part 1 of the GPDO, the term “highway” can apply to an unadopted road (i.e. a private road that’s not maintainable at the public expense).
    [Note: The Inspector concludes that a particular road is a “highway” regardless of “Whether it is described as a public right of way or a private way”].
  • For the purposes of the post-15/04/2015 version(s) of Part 1 of the GPDO, the term “highway” can apply to a cul-de-sac.
    [Note: The Inspector concludes that a particular cul-de-sac is a “highway”].
  • More than one roof slope facing the same direction can form “the principal elevation”. (*)

January 2019 - Code a01014 (appeal allowed):

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

January 2019 - Code a01013 (appeal dismissed):

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

January 2019 - Code a01012 (split decision):

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

January 2019 - Code a01011 (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.