“Part 1 of the GPDO – GENERAL Appeal Decisions” – 10 additional appeal decisions (total = 1,374) …

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:

January 2021 - Code a01268 (appeal dismissed):

  • Where the roof of a property has raised parapet walls (e.g. along the line of the party walls between the application site and the adjoining properties), then the building up on top of these raised parapet walls does not fall within the scope of Class B. (*)
    [Note: The raised parapet wall is not a party wall (as there is no adjoining property)].
    [Quote: “In order to benefit from the PD rights set out in Class B, any roof extension needs to be positioned within the roof structure of the dwelling. It is considered that the parapet walls are not part of the roof structure as they are upward extensions of the external walls of the building. The appellant's proposal would involve extending the parapet walls upwards even further and as they are not part of the roof structure, the dormer would fall outside the scope of Class B, which is confined to additions or alterations to the roof.”].

January 2021 - Code a01267 (appeal allowed):

  • Where a proposed extension (under Class A) would be separated from another proposed extension (under Class A) by a relatively large gap, then this appeal decision provides an example of where it was concluded that the phrase “the enlarged part of the dwellinghouse” applies to each of the extensions separately. [Note: In other words, each of the extensions should be assessed individually against those limitations and conditions of Class A that apply to “the enlarged part of the dwellinghouse”]. (*)
    [Note: The 2 x side extensions and the rear extension would be separated by the corner(s) of the main house].
  • Where it’s proposed to erect two separate side extensions, one on each side of a detached house, then each of these side extensions can have a width up to half the width of the original dwellinghouse (i.e. this limit does not apply to the combined width of these side extensions).
    [Note: This appeal decision implies (rather than states) this conclusion].
  • Class A does allow an extension with a roof that joins onto the roof of the main house. (*)
  • This appeal decision provides an example of where it was concluded that a Class A extension with a roof that joins onto the roof of the main house should also be assessed against Class B, albeit as well as Class C (without applying the 15cm projection limit of C.1(b)). (*)
    [Note: The roof of the extension does not contain a habitable room].
  • Class G can be used concurrently with other Classes. (*)
  • For example, a proposed extension under Class A can include the installation or alteration of a chimney / flue / SVP under Class G. (*)
    [Note: The works include the alteration of an SVP].

January 2021 - Code a01266 (appeal dismissed):

  • Where a proposed first floor extension would be on top of an existing (non-original) ground floor extension, then “the enlarged part of the dwellinghouse” has “a single storey” (i.e. rather than “more than a single storey” / “more than one storey”). (*)
    [Note: Relates to A.1(f) and A.1(i) of the GPDO 2015].
    [Note: The Inspector concludes that “the enlarged part of the dwellinghouse” has “a single storey” regardless of “Whether or not the existing projection forms part of the original dwellinghouse”].
  • Where a proposed first floor extension would be on top of an original ground floor projection, then “the enlarged part of the dwellinghouse” has “a single storey” (i.e. rather than “more than a single storey” / “more than one storey”). (*)
    [Note: Relates to A.1(f) and A.1(i) of the GPDO 2015].
    [Note: The Inspector concludes that “the enlarged part of the dwellinghouse” has “a single storey” regardless of “Whether or not the existing projection forms part of the original dwellinghouse”].
  • Where a proposed extension (under Class A) would be attached to an existing extension, then the phrase “the enlarged part of the dwellinghouse” applies to only the proposed extension. [Note: In other words, only the proposed extension should be assessed against those limitations and conditions of Class A that apply to “the enlarged part of the dwellinghouse”]. (*)
    [Note: This appeal decision implies (rather than states) this conclusion].
    [Note: The Inspector concludes that the phrase “the enlarged part of the dwellinghouse” applies to only the proposed extension regardless of “Whether or not the existing projection forms part of the original dwellinghouse”].
  • Where a proposed extension (under Class A) would be attached to an original projection, then the phrase “the enlarged part of the dwellinghouse” applies to only the proposed extension. [Note: In other words, only the proposed extension should be assessed against those limitations and conditions of Class A that apply to “the enlarged part of the dwellinghouse”].
    [Note: This appeal decision implies (rather than states) this conclusion].
    [Note: The Inspector concludes that the phrase “the enlarged part of the dwellinghouse” applies to only the proposed extension regardless of “Whether or not the existing projection forms part of the original dwellinghouse”].
  • This appeal decision provides an example of where it was concluded that the roof pitch of the extension is not the same as the roof pitch of the original house.
    [Note: The roof pitch of the extension is approx 10 degrees, and the roof pitch of the main house is approx 40 degrees].

January 2021 - Code a01265 (split decision):

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

January 2021 - Code a01264 (appeal dismissed):

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

January 2021 - Code a01263 (appeal dismissed):

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

January 2021 - Code a01262 (appeal dismissed):

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

January 2021 - Code a01261 (appeal dismissed):

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

December 2020 - Code a01260 (appeal allowed):

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

December 2020 - Code a01259 (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.