The "GPDO Part 1 (All Classes) - LDC Appeal Decisions" document has been updated to include 5 additional appeal decisions relating to householder permitted development legislation, for which the conclusions are as follows:

July 2023 - Code a01576 (appeal dismissed):

• This appeal decision provides an example of where it was concluded that a particular piece of land is not within the “curtilage” of the property.
  [Note: The Inspector states that “The driveway extension would take place on land which presently forms part of the public footpath”].

July 2023 - Code a01575 (appeal dismissed):

• This appeal decision provides an example of where the Inspector concluded that a larger rear extension subject of an application for an LDC is not in accordance with the details that were approved (or submitted) during the prior approval process.
  [Quote: "The prior approval notification application form states that the maximum height of the proposed single-storey extension would be 4m. However, the maximum height of the extension as built is 3.65m. The appellant contends that the term ‘maximum height’ should be interpreted as the maximum height the roof of the extension would be and therefore, by implication, the height of the extension could be any height providing it does not exceed this height. Limitation A.1.(g) already limits such extensions to no more than 4m in height. The requirement to include the maximum height of the enlarged part of the dwellinghouse as part of the prior approval notification application under condition A.4.(2)(a)(ii) would therefore be superfluous if it could be interpreted as meaning that no part of the extension would be more than 4m in height. Moreover, A.4.(2)(a)(ii) does not necessarily relate to the height of the roof. It covers any part of the enlarged part of the dwellinghouse, which may include, for example, a chimney. Accordingly, the maximum height means the highest part of the extension. Condition A.4.(11)(b), states ‘The development must be carried out…(b) where prior approval is not required, or where sub-paragraph (10)(c) applies, in accordance with the information provided under sub-paragraph (2), unless the local planning authority and the developer agree otherwise in writing.’ The maximum height of the extension is not 4m, as identified that it would be in the prior approval notification application. There is no evidence before me that the Council and the appellants have agreed in writing that the maximum height of the single storey extension would be 3.65m. Consequently, the extension breaches Condition A.4(11)(b)."].

July 2023 - Code a01574 (appeal dismissed):

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

July 2023 - Code a01573 (appeal dismissed):

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

June 2023 - Code a01572 (appeal dismissed):

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

Notes:

• To view the conclusions, summaries, and decision notices for any of the above appeals, please view the "GPDO Part 1 (All Classes) - LDC Appeal Decisions" document. As a member of the Planning Jungle website, you can view the decision notices for all of the appeals on the website 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.