Appeal Decision 64 - Certificate of Lawful Development.

December 2009 - Code a00064

Summary of Case (appeal allowed): 

The property is a two-storey mid-terrace house. The application was for a proposed single storey rear extension, which would have had a mono-pitch roof, sloping up towards the main house. This would have had height 2.4m along its rear elevation, increasing to height 3.8m where it meets the rear wall of the main house. 

The Council refused the application on the basis that they “interpreted the eaves to mean the edge of a roof which also extends to the highest part of the proposed pitched roof”, which appears to be a reference to the side edges of the mono-pitch roof (i.e. the edges which rise from 2.4m to 3.8m). The Inspector noted that the Council had subsequently reviewed their interpretation of that paragraph, and now agreed that the proposed development would be lawful. 

The Inspector agreed that the proposed rear extension would be lawful, and stated that “the eaves are at the lowest part of the roof, in this case 2.4 m high”.  

Main Conclusions: 

·       For an extension with a pitched roof, the “eaves” of the extension are the lower end of the slope, and can not be taken to be the side edges (i.e. verge) of the slope.
[Relevant to: “Eaves”, A.1(g), E.1(e)].

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

·       Appeal Decision Notice:
http://planningjungle.com/?s2member_file_download=a00064-Appeal-Decision-Notice.pdf&s2member_skip_confirmation&s2member_file_inline=yes 

·       Drawings:
http://planningjungle.com/?s2member_file_download=a00064-Drawings.pdf&s2member_skip_confirmation&s2member_file_inline=yes 

Download documents and diagrams of useful

Permitted Development information