I have recently had a Prior approval refused for a single storey rear
extension which was identical to the one approved next door in 2018.
I have asked the planner for clarification on on the reasons for
refusal but several days have now passed. Please can anyone explain
why a single storey extension to the rear of a semi detached house and
to the rear of its converted garage is not considered to fall within
GDPO Section A.1 (J)(iii). I have written the planners attempt at
clarification which I cannot get my head around.
In relation to RFR no.2, it is noted that there has been a prior
notification application approved at no.4 Miriam Road (18/3316/PN1).
However, similar to the existing rear extension at no.2, the
extension shown on the as existing drawings submitted for no.4 is
considered to be original. This is largely due to the established
pattern of development along this part of the existing terrace.
The main difference between the determination of this application
and that approved for no.4 back in 2018 is that the Council has
since been made aware of the following appeal decision:
In Arnold v Secretary of State for Communities and Local
Government [2015] EWHC 1197 (Admin) (1st April 2015) that the
demolition of an original elevation did not remove the relevant
requirements of the General Permitted Development Order (2015) (as
amended), and that for the purposes of calculating the limitations
of permitted development, the starting point should be the location
of the original wall, based on the original footprint of the house,
whether the wall has been demolished or not.
Since the Council was made aware of this appeal, we do now
consider that if an extension projects beyond a side wall (despite
being either previously demolished or to be removed as part of the
proposal) and has a width greater than half the width of the
dwellinghouse, that the proposal would fail to comply with criteria
(j)(iii) of Class A of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country
Planning (General Permitted Development) Order (2015) (as amended).
My apologies that you feel that you are a disadvantage over the
earlier approval at no.4 but unfortunately, the emergence of case
law and subsequent appeal decisions does mean that there can be
changes in how the Town and Country (General Permitted Development)
Order 2015 (as amended) is interpreted.
