ask us a question on permitted development           Permitted Development England
How to build a home extension  without Planning Permission using your PD rights - Oct. 1st 2008



Home Page About Us FAQ Advertise on this site Disclaimer Privacy Contact Us Site Map

Appeal Decision 197 - Certificate of Lawful Development.

This appeal decision summary and assessment has been produced by Planning Jungle Limited.  For more information, please go to


January 2011 - Code a00197


Summary of Case (appeal allowed): 


The property is a large detached house set within very considerable grounds. Indeed, the nearest highway is approx 150m from the house. The south-east elevation is the principal elevation, and it was accepted by the Council that this elevation does not front a highway. An original two-storey front projection currently projects forward from part of the width of this front elevation (towards the north-eastern end of the front elevation). The application was for a proposed (full-width) two-storey front extension, which would replace the original (part-width) two-storey front projection. 


The key issue was whether the proposed side and rear 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 Inspector stated the following: 


“The proposed extension would exceed 4 metres in height, would have two storeys and would be as wide as the original dwellinghouse, so the crucial question is whether it would extend beyond a wall forming a side elevation of the original dwellinghouse. 


There is an existing projecting wing to [the application site] which occupies part of the site for the proposed extension, and would be demolished to enable the extension to be built. This existing wing forms part of the “original dwellinghouse” as defined by virtue of Article 1 of the GPDO.  


The new extension would be considerably wider than the existing projecting wing, and on this basis the Council contend that it would extend beyond the south-western flank wall of that wing, which they correctly regard as a side elevation of the original dwellinghouse. However, the projecting wing is to be demolished before the extension is built. Once the wing has been removed, the proposed extension would not extend beyond a wall forming a side elevation of the original dwellinghouse, and therefore I find that it would not be prohibited by paragraph A.1(h) of the GPDO. 


This finding is consistent with the appeal decision issued on 5 February 2010, concerning a proposed extension to a property in [February 2010 - Code a00097], which was submitted by the appellant. In that case, as here, an existing projecting element of the property was to be demolished and a new, wider extension which was to be built in its place was found to constitute permitted development.” 


[Note: The Inspector dismissed the appellant’s application for costs, and in doing so rejected the argument that it was unreasonable for the Council to issue a decision that was contrary to an interpretation in a previous appeal decision]. 


Main Conclusions: 


·       The phrase “a wall forming a side elevation of the original dwellinghouse” does not apply to an original side wall that has previously been demolished.
[Relevant to: “A side elevation of the original dwellinghouse”, A.1(h), A.2(b), E.3].


·       Where the principal elevation does not front a highway, an extension can extend in front of the principal elevation.
[Relevant to: “Principal Elevation”, A.1(d)].


·       Furthermore, in such cases, the amount by which the extension can extend beyond the principal elevation does not appear to be directly* restricted by any limitation.
(*i.e. other than the general requirement to remain within the “curtilage”, and the general restriction of A.1(a) that prevents more than 50% of the original garden being covered by buildings).
[Relevant to: “Principal Elevation”, A.1(d)].


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


·       Appeal Decision Notice: 

·       Drawings: 

·       Council’s Delegated Report: 

·       Costs Decision Notice: 





Download documents and diagrams of useful

Permitted Development information

permitted development documents download



 Appeal Decisions