The "GPDO Part 1 (All Classes) - LDC 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 2025 - Code a01771:

• This appeal decision provides an example of where it was concluded that a particular structure has “more than a single storey” / “more than one storey” (i.e. rather than “a single storey”).
  [Note: The outbuilding contains four rooms at an upper level, and two rooms at a lower level. The Inspector states that “Finished floor levels are not shown on the proposed drawings but there are shown to be 9 risers in the staircase”, and states that “The two levels sit side by side, such that one is not directly above the other as would be the case in a normal two-storey structure”].
• This appeal decision provides an example of where it was concluded that a particular structure does not constitute a “verandah, balcony or raised platform”. [Note: In other words, such a structure is not prevented by the limitations about balconies (i.e. A.1(k), B.1(e), and E.1(h))].
  [Conclusion: A flat surface on one side of an outbuilding, with area (approx) 5.6m x 0.9m = 5.0m2, recessed by approx 0.5m in relation to a wall on each side, and covered by the approx 0.9m overhang of the roof, is NOT a “verandah”].

January 2025 - Code a01770 (appeal allowed):

• [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.