Appeal Decision 163 - Certificate of Lawful Development.

November 2010 - Code a00164

Summary of Case (appeal allowed): 

The property is a two-storey (plus roof level) semi-detached house, with an original single storey rear projection. The application was for a proposed extension to the side of the latter structure, within the infill area, with length 3.0m, and a proposed extension to the rear of the original single storey rear projection, with length 1.8m. All of those parts of the proposals within 2m of the boundaries would have flat roofs and parapet walls at heights not exceeding 3m, whilst some of those parts of the proposals more than 2m from the boundaries would have flat roofs and parapet walls at heights exceeding 3m. 

The Council refused the application on the basis that parts of the overall combined structure would be within 2m of the boundary whilst parts of the eaves of the overall combined structure would be at height exceeding 3m. The Council considered that a flat roof has “eaves”, which are namely “where the side wall meets the roof at the top of the extension”. 

The key issue was whether the proposals would be contrary to Class A, part A.1(g), which states that “Development is not permitted by Class A if … the enlarged part of the dwellinghouse would be within 2 metres of the boundary of the curtilage of the dwellinghouse, and the height of the eaves of the enlarged part would exceed 3 metres”. 

The Inspector stated the following: 

“… I have been referred by the appellant to two appeal decisions in which the definition of “eaves” has been considered in some detail. In the more recent of those decisions [January 2010 - Code a00073] the Inspector explained that the GPDO is silent as far as a definition of eaves is concerned. He therefore looked at a general dictionary definition, from the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, which is “the projecting edge of a roof, etc., which overhangs the side”. He also referred to the more technical definition contained in the Oxford Dictionary of Architecture and Landscape Architecture (James Stevens Curl OUP 1999), which says, “Eave (pl. eaves). Sheltered area under eaves. Eaves Lowest part of a pitched roof projecting beyond the naked* of the wall below. *Naked. Unadorned plain surface of anything, but especially the main plane of a building’s façade”. 

The common theme that he drew from this, and that I draw also, is that these definitions denote some measure of roof or other overhang beyond a wall. That decision was issued in January 2010 and the technical guidance entitled Permitted Development for Householders has been issued since. However, that also contains no definition of the word “eaves” and so there is nothing that would justify a different approach. 

The plans submitted with the application, together with the axonometric views prepared by the appellant’s agents, confirm that the rear extension would not have any measure of roof or other overhanging beyond a wall, as there is a parapet wall running around the extension and no overhang beyond the extension’s walls. It accordingly has no eaves. Thus, I am forced to the conclusion that limitation A.1(g) does not apply and that the proposed rear extension would constitute permitted development”. 

[Note: Part of the proposals would project 1.8m from the end of the original single storey rear projection (which is to a line significantly further than 3m from the main two-storey rear wall). As such, by allowing this appeal, the Inspector supports the interpretation that the rear wall of the original single storey rear projection is still a “rear wall of the original dwellinghouse” for the purposes of Class A, part A.1(e)]. 

Main Conclusions: 

·       The term “eaves” does not apply to the edge of a flat roof (note: in this particular case, the flat roof would not have an overhang that would project beyond the line of the walls).
[Note: This would appear to contradict at least one other appeal decision – for further information see the entry in the “Reference Section” on “Eaves”].
[Relevant to: “Eaves”, A.1(c), A.1(g), E.1(e)].

·       The term “eaves” does not apply to the top of a parapet wall.
[Relevant to: “Eaves”, A.1(c), A.1(g), E.1(e)].

·       Where a property has an original rear projection, then even if this is only single storey, the rear wall of this projection is still a “rear wall of the original dwellinghouse” for the purposes of Class A, part A.1(e).
[Relevant to: “The rear wall of the original dwellinghouse”, A.1(e), A.1(f), A.2(c)].

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

·       Appeal Decision Notice:
http://planningjungle.com/?s2member_file_download=a00164-Appeal-Decision-Notice.pdf&s2member_skip_confirmation&s2member_file_inline=yes 

·       Drawings:
http://planningjungle.com/?s2member_file_download=a00164-Drawings.pdf&s2member_skip_confirmation&s2member_file_inline=yes 

·       Council’s Delegated Report:
http://planningjungle.com/?s2member_file_download=a00164-Councils-Delegated-Report.pdf&s2member_skip_confirmation&s2member_file_inline=yes 

Download documents and diagrams of useful

Permitted Development information