The "GPDO Part 1 (All Classes) - LDC Appeal Decisions" document has been updated to include 4 additional appeal decisions relating to householder permitted development legislation, for which the conclusions are as follows:

July 2024 - Code a01721 (appeal allowed):

• This appeal decision provides an example of where the applicant submitted (or offered to submit) an amended drawing during the appeal process, and the Inspector did accept this amended drawing. (*)
  [Quote: “During the course of this appeal the appellant submitted revised drawing No 02A, received on 23 July 2024, which supersedes drawing No 02 originally submitted. Since the Council were given the opportunity to comment on this revised drawing, and have raised no objection, I am satisfied that there would be no injustice to either party. Accordingly, I have considered the appeal on this basis of this revised drawing.”].
• In the second of the above diagrams, (at least) part of “Roof Extension D” “extends beyond” the outside face of “Wall 1” (i.e. for the purposes of B.2(b)(ii)). [Note: The diagrams are viewable within the “Extend beyond” topic of this document]. (*)
  [Conclusion: The roof extension does comply with B.2(b)(ii) on the basis that it constitutes “an enlargement which joins the original roof to the roof of a rear or side extension”].
• Where a proposed roof extension (under Class B) would be attached to an existing roof extension, then the phrase “the enlargement” within B.2(b) applies to the combined structure. [Note: In other words, the combined structure should be assessed against those limitations and conditions of Class B that apply to “the enlargement”]. (*)
  [Quote: “In the guidance for condition B.2(b) it states: “The enlarged part of the roof may join the original roof to the roof of a rear or side extension (generally referred to as an ‘L-shaped dormer’ on a main roof and ‘outrigger’ or ‘back addition’ roof), whether the part of the house being extended forms part of the original house or is an enlargement, or the shape or level of the pitch of the roofs are different in relation to each other”. This strongly suggests to me that the exception applies in this case as it describes the situation as proposed here and indicates that whether the outrigger is original, or a later addition is immaterial; as is whether the level of the pitch of the main roof and that on the outrigger are different. A straightforward reading of the exception in B.2(b) is that “an” enlargement should join the original roof to the roof of a rear or side extension. The proposed enlargement clearly joins the main roof of the house to the roof of the outrigger – in my view it is not appropriate to treat each arm of the L as if it were a separate development.”].
• This appeal decision provides an example of where it was concluded that a particular roof extension does constitute “an enlargement which joins the original roof to the roof of a rear or side extension” for the purposes of B.2(b). (*)
  [Note: The proposed roof extension would join the existing (non-original) rear dormer (on the main rear roof) onto the pitched roof of the original two-storey rear projection].
• Where a property has a secondary roof that’s slightly lower than the main roof, then an extension on top of this secondary roof should be assessed against Class B (i.e. rather than Class A). (*)
  [Note: The secondary roof is the roof of an original two-storey rear projection on a two-storey house].
• This appeal decision provides an example of where it was concluded that significant weight should be attached to the advice within the “Permitted development rights for householders - Technical Guidance” document. (*)
• For the purposes of the post-06/04/2014 version(s) of Part 1 of the GPDO, where a property has an original rear projection with a side-facing pitched roof, part of which is lower than the main rear roof, then an “L”-shaped roof extension (or similar) that extends from the main rear roof onto the side roof of the original rear projection is permitted development. [Note: The roof extension, for part of its (rearmost) width, extends across the original rear eaves]. (*)
  [Note: The front part of the roof extension is existing, and the rear part is proposed].
  [Conclusion: The works comply with Class B. In particular, the works comply with B.2(b) on the basis that the roof extension does constitute “an enlargement which joins the original roof to the roof of a rear or side extension”].
• The phrase “the highest part of the ... roof” relates to the property as a whole (i.e. not only to the part of the property that’s being altered or enlarged). (*)
• For example, where a property has a secondary roof that’s lower than the main roof, then an extension on top of this secondary roof can be higher than the highest part of this secondary roof (i.e. so long as the extension is not higher than the highest part of the main roof). (*)
  [Note: The extension is higher than the ridge-line of the original two-storey rear projection].
• This appeal decision provides an example of where it was concluded that particular works do fall within the scope of Class B, without the Inspector referring to the issue of whether or not the works exceed what constitutes “the enlargement of a dwellinghouse consisting of an addition or alteration to its roof”. (*)
  [Note: The works include an “L”-shaped roof extension (or similar) that covers most (or all) of the roof of the rear projection].

July 2024 - Code a01720 (appeal dismissed):

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

July 2024 - Code a01719 (appeal allowed):

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

July 2024 - Code a01718 (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.