The Part 1 of the GPDO - GENERAL Appeal Decisions document has been updated to include 2 additional appeal decisions relating to householder permitted development legislation, for which the conclusions are as follows:

January 2023 - Code a01516 (appeal allowed):

• This appeal decision provides an example of where it was concluded that a particular roof extension does constitute “a hip-to-gable enlargement” for the purposes of B.2(b). (*)
  [Note: The works consist of a hip-to-gable roof extension (to the main side roof), 2 x rear dormers, and 3 x front rooflights. The Inspector concludes that the entire development (as a single operation) constitutes “a hip-to-gable enlargement” for the purposes of B.2(b), and that therefore the works are not subject to the requirement for the original rear eaves to be maintained or reinstated].
  [Quote: “It is clear from the application documents that a single act of development is proposed, and, it is clear from the description of development and the drawings provided that this is a case of a hip-to-gable enlargement. Condition B.2.(b)(i)(aa) contains the phrase “other than in the case of a hip-to-gable enlargement”, meaning that the appeal development is, in my view, unambiguously exempt from Condition B.2.(b)(i)(aa).”].
• This appeal decision states, or implies, that where a roof extension falls within one of the exceptions set out by B.2(b)(i) or B.2(b)(ii) (i.e. in the case of “a hip-to-gable enlargement” or “an enlargement which joins the original roof to the roof of a rear or side extension”), then all parts of the roof extension (including those parts that are not responsible for the exception) are exempt from the subsequent requirements of B.2(b)(i) or B.2(b)(ii). (*)
  [Conclusion: The roof extension constitutes “a hip-to-gable enlargement” (i.e. due to the side part of the roof extension), and the rear part of the roof extension is not subject to the requirement for the original rear eaves to be maintained or reinstated].
  [Quote: “It is clear from the application documents that a single act of development is proposed, and, it is clear from the description of development and the drawings provided that this is a case of a hip-to-gable enlargement. Condition B.2.(b)(i)(aa) contains the phrase “other than in the case of a hip-to-gable enlargement”, meaning that the appeal development is, in my view, unambiguously exempt from Condition B.2.(b)(i)(aa).”].

January 2023 - Code a01515 (appeal dismissed):

• [Note: To view this information, please log onto the website with a current membership.]

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.