Appeal Decision 111 - Certificate of Lawful Development.

March 2010 - Code a00111  

Summary of Case (appeal allowed): 

The property is a two-storey detached house.  This part of the road is curved, such that the north elevation of the property faces onto the road directly, whilst the east elevation of the property faces onto the road at an angle (see OS map at the end of the appeal decision notice).  The application was for a proposed two-storey extension to the west elevation, the ground floor of which would project 4m from the west elevation and the first floor of which would project 3m.  The roof of the two-storey extension would join onto the roof of the main house, with eaves at the same level and a ridge-line at a slightly lower level. 

The key issue was whether the proposed extension would be contrary to Class A, part A.1(d), which states that “Development is not permitted by Class A if … the enlarged part of the dwellinghouse would extend beyond a wall which— (i) fronts a highway, and (ii) forms either the principal elevation or a side elevation of the original 

Dwellinghouse”. 

In determining which elevation is “the principal elevation”, the Inspector noted a number of factors.  On the east elevation, he noted the impression of grandeur given by the 2 x two-storey bay windows with a first floor veranda between them, and he noted that these windows provided the sole prospect and source of light for the lounge and dining room on the ground floor, and for the two bedrooms on the first floor.  In contrast, on the north elevation, the Inspector noted that while it contains the main entrance, except for this door and a first floor bay window, the wall is largely blank.  The Inspector concluded that the east elevation is “the principal elevation”, and stated the following: 

“Insofar as the proposed extension would abut the rear wall of the original house and would not project beyond an original side elevation the proposed extension would not infringe clause (h). I have also considered the proposed development against all the other clauses in paragraph A.1 of Class A but in my opinion it does not contravene any of them. Accordingly, I find the proposed extension to comprise permitted development countenanced by paragraph A of Class A of Part 1 of the schedule to the 2008 Order.” 

Although not specifically addressed by the Inspector, the fact that this appeal was allowed implies that Class A does permit an extension with a roof that would join onto the roof of the main house.  It also implies that where it is proposed to erect a two-storey rear extension, Class A, part A.1(f) would restrict only the first floor to a depth of 3m. 

Main Conclusions: 

·       The principal elevation is not necessarily the elevation that contains the main entrance.
[Relevant to: “Principal Elevation”, A.1(d), B.1(b), E.1(b), F.1, G.1(b)]. 

·       This appeal decision provides an example of the types of factors that should be taken into consideration when determining which elevation is “the principal elevation”.
[Relevant to: “Principal Elevation”, A.1(d), B.1(b), E.1(b), F.1, G.1(b)].

 

·       Class A does permit an extension with a roof that would join onto the roof of the main house.
[Note: This would appear to contradict at least one other appeal decision – for further information see the entry in the “Reference Section” on “Interaction between Class A, Class B, and Class C”].
[Relevant to: “Interaction between Class A, Class B, and Class C”, Class A, A.1(i), Class B, B.1(c)]. 

·       Where it is proposed to erect a two-storey rear extension, Class A, part A.1(f) would restrict only the first floor to a depth of 3m.  It therefore is possible on a detached property to erect (as a single operation) a two-storey rear extension that has a ground floor with depth 4m and a first floor with depth 3m.
[Note: This would appear to contradict at least one other appeal decision – for further information see the entry in the “Reference Section” on “A.1(f)”].
[Relevant to: A.1(f)]. 

Links to the “Appeal Decision Notice” and other associated documents (e.g. drawings, etc): 

·       Appeal Decision Notice:
http://planningjungle.com/?s2member_file_download=a00111-Appeal-Decision-Notice.pdf&s2member_skip_confirmation&s2member_file_inline=yes 

·       Existing Drawings:
http://planningjungle.com/?s2member_file_download=a00111-Existing-Drawings.pdf&s2member_skip_confirmation&s2member_file_inline=yes 

·       Proposed Drawings:
http://planningjungle.com/?s2member_file_download=a00111-Proposed-Drawings.pdf&s2member_skip_confirmation&s2member_file_inline=yes 

Download documents and diagrams of useful

Permitted Development information