Appeal Decision 54 - Certificate of Lawful Development.
This appeal decision summary and
assessment has been produced by Planning Jungle Limited. For more information, please go to www.planningjungle.com/?p=20
December 2009 - Code a00054
Summary of Case (appeal
The property is a detached
house, within a conservation area. The application was for a proposed outbuilding.
The key issue was whether the
proposed outbuilding would be contrary to Class E, part E.3, which states that “In the case of any land within
the curtilage of the dwellinghouse which is article 1(5) land, development is not permitted by Class E if any
part of the building … would be situated on land between a wall forming a side elevation of the
dwellinghouse and the boundary of the curtilage of the dwellinghouse”.
The appeal also involved
comparisons with Class E, part E.1(b), which states that “Development is not permitted by Class E if … any part
of the building … would be situated on land forward of a wall forming the principal elevation of the
The Inspector stated the
“There is a clear
difference between the words “forward of a wall” in E1(b) and “between a wall” in E3. I take
“forward of” to cover any building that is within the curtilage and lies in front of the wall or a line drawn
outwards to the boundary of the property from either end of that wall. However, I consider that “between” should
be considered in the context of its dictionary meaning which, in simple terms, is the interval or area that is
bounded by two or more points or lines. I therefore consider that the proposed siting of the outbuilding does
not fall within an area that is between a side elevation and the boundary.”
The phrase “situated on land
forward of a wall forming the principal elevation of the original dwellinghouse” applies not
just to the area directly in front of the wall, but also to the area in front of the imaginary line of
the wall when extended to either side.
[Relevant to: E.1(b)].
Class E, part E.3 only
prevents outbuildings from being within the area that is directly in between the side wall of the
house and the side boundary. In other words, this limitation does not prevent outbuildings from being
within the additional area that can be covered if considering the imaginary line of the side wall when
extended forwards and rearwards.
[Relevant to: E.3].
Links to the “Appeal
Decision Notice” and other associated documents (e.g. drawings, etc):
Download documents and diagrams of