Appeal Decision 89 - Certificate of Lawful Development.

January 2010 - Code a00089

Summary of Case (appeal dismissed): 

Numbers 31 and 33 are a pair of semi-detached house that were converted from a single building to the west of the road (which runs north-south). The building was converted with a north-south divide, with number 33 (the application site) on the west side, meaning that the application site has a north, west, and south elevation, but no east elevation (the latter is the party wall with number 31). The application was for a two-storey extension to the west elevation. 

The first key issue was whether the proposed extension would be contrary to Class A, part A.1(h), which states that “Development is not permitted by Class A if … the enlarged part of the dwellinghouse would extend beyond a wall forming a side elevation of the original dwellinghouse, and would— (i) exceed 4 metres in height, (ii) have more than one storey, or (iii) have a width greater than half the width of the original dwellinghouse”. 

The appellant argued (as shown on the submitted drawing) that the north and south elevations are side elevations, and the west elevation is a rear elevation. 

The Inspector examined the architectural features of the property, including the position of its front door, and his comments included the following: 

“The northern and southern elevations are described as ‘side elevations’, and that to the west as the ‘rear elevation’ in the submitted plans. That does not however make them so for present purposes. To my mind indeed it illustrates the weakness of the Appellant’s case, as it means the dwelling, as opposed to the building, would have no front, or ‘principal’, elevation. Whatever the original arrangements as a single dwelling, [the application site] can only now be reasonably described as being set at right angles to the road, with the southern elevation being the front of the house, the northern being the rear elevation and the western the side elevation. The fact that the main area of garden is to the side and front of the house rather than behind it merely reflects the unusual site layout.  

I have no hesitation in finding the southern elevation to be the front of the house, both functionally and architecturally. It follows that the western elevation is a ‘side elevation’ for present purposes and therefore that the proposal is caught by the terms of paragraph A.1(h), certainly in the first two respects, if not all three”. 

Main Conclusions: 

·       No conclusions (because specific to this particular property) 

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

·       Appeal Decision Notice:
http://planningjungle.com/?s2member_file_download=a00089-Appeal-Decision-Notice.pdf&s2member_skip_confirmation&s2member_file_inline=yes 

·       Drawings:
http://planningjungle.com/?s2member_file_download=a00089-Drawings.pdf&s2member_skip_confirmation&s2member_file_inline=yes 

Download documents and diagrams of useful

Permitted Development information