Appeal Decision 159 - Certificate of Lawful
This appeal decision summary and
assessment has been produced by Planning Jungle Limited. For more information, please go to www.planningjungle.com/?p=20
November 2010 - Code a00159
Summary of Case (appeal
The property is a large
detached house, which has previously been significantly extended. The application was for a proposed single
storey rear extension. The outer wall of the proposed extension would project 4m from the rear wall of the main
house, and the eaves / roof overhang would project a further 0.25m (to a total of 4.25m).
Although drawings are
available on the Council’s website, and include a proposed site plan, they do not appear to include the proposed
floor plans and elevations. As such, please refer to the extract below from the appeal decision notice for a
further description of the proposals. .
The key issue was whether the
projection of the eaves / roof overhang by more than 4m beyond the rear wall of the original house would be
contrary to Class A, part A.1(e), which states that “development is not permitted by Class A if … the enlarged
part of the dwellinghouse would … extend beyond the rear wall of the original dwellinghouse by more than by more
than 4 metres in the case of a detached dwellinghouse …”.
The Inspector stated the
“The property is a
detached, single storey dwelling, originally built in 1860, and subsequently extended a number of times. The
proposed conservatory would project 4 metres from the rear wall of an extension built in 1988/89 which links an
earlier garage to the original building. On site it was discovered, and agreed, that the section of the original
wall on the rear elevation measured 4.9 metres and that the proposed extension would ‘overlap’ or be attached to
the original wall by about the length of a brick – roughly 200mm.
The Council’s view is that
the proposal would fail the limitation [A.1(e)] in 2 respects. First, it is argued the projecting eaves/roof
overhang should be taken into account when calculating the depth of the projection – in which case the extension
in this proposed development would be 4.25m deep.
published technical guidance from the Department for Communities and Local Government has clarified this matter.
The guidance, which is accompanied by an illustration, states on page 16 that “Measurement of the extension
beyond the rear wall should be made from the base of the rear wall of the original house to the outer edge of
the wall of the extension (not including any guttering or barge boards).” Interpretation of the Order is
ultimately a matter for the courts. However, in the absence of any case law on this point being cited by either
party, I see no reason not to follow the technical guidance. On that basis, I conclude the extension would not
exceed 4m in depth”.
The Inspector also concluded
that Class A, part A.1(e) does not require a proposed extension to be directly attached to the rear wall of the
Where the rear wall of an
extension would comply with the 3m/4m rear projection limit of Class A, part A.1(e), but the eaves /
guttering / soffit / fascia of the extension would project slightly past this line, then this would still be
Links to the “Appeal Decision
Notice” and other associated documents (e.g. drawings, etc):
· Appeal Decision
Download documents and diagrams of