“Part 1 of the GPDO – GENERAL Appeal Decisions” – 10 additional appeal decisions (total = 1,305) …

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:

July 2020 - Code a01199 (appeal allowed):

  • The height of a structure should be measured from the highest part of the adjacent ground level (i.e. rather than from each part of the adjacent ground level). (*)
    [Note: The structure is an outbuilding].

July 2020 - Code a01198 (1 x split decision, 1 x appeal dismissed):

  • 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”.
  • “The principal elevation” is not necessarily the elevation that contains the main entrance door.
  • A house that’s become lawful through the passage of time (i.e. the 4 or 10 year rule) does benefit from Part 1 of the GPDO. (*)
    [Note: This appeal decision implies (rather than states) this conclusion].
  • This appeal decision provides an example of where the Inspector concluded that the submitted information was not sufficient to constitute an application for prior approval in accordance with the requirements of Part 1 paragraph A.4(2).
    [Note: In 2018 the applicant submitted an application form titled “Application for a Lawful Development Certificate for a Proposed use or development. Town and Country Planning Act 1990: Section 192, as amended ...”].
    [Quote: “The appeal is against the Council’s decision to refuse the [current] LDC [application] and this is confirmed by the appellant in his statement. The [2018] LDC [application] (18/00784/CLP) was submitted as a notification to the Council of the appellant’s “intention to build an 8 metre extension under permitted development rights”. Due to no determination being made “within the time framework”, as set down by the permitted development statutory legislation, the appellant believed the “notification is deemed approved”. Unfortunately, the [2018] LDC application used to notify the Council of the intention to build an 8 metre extension under permitted development rights was the incorrect procedure. This is subject to the prior approval requirement for large household extensions. Prior approval is deemed to be granted where the Council has not made a determination within the relevant period. While a large extension was part of the development, which was the subject of [the 2018 LDC] application 18/00784/CLP, it is clear however that that application was not an application for prior approval. Hence the only consequence of the failure of the Council to determine [2018] LDC application 18/00784/CLP within the relevant period was the right to appeal, which was not in any case exercised on that basis.”].

July 2020 - Code a01197 (appeal dismissed):

  • 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”.
  • “The principal elevation” is not necessarily the elevation that fronts a highway.
  • E.1(c) not only prevents an outbuilding from being directly in front of the principal elevation, but also prevents an outbuilding from being in front of the imaginary line of the principal elevation when extended to either side.

July 2020 - Code a01196 (appeal dismissed):

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

July 2020 - Code a01195 (appeal dismissed):

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

July 2020 - Code a01194 (appeal dismissed):

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

July 2020 - Code a01193 (appeal dismissed):

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

July 2020 - Code a01192 (appeal allowed):

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

July 2020 - Code a01191 (split decision):

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

July 2020 - Code a01190 (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.