Appeal 6000134

The appeal is allowed and prior approval is deemed to be granted under the provisions of Article 3(1) and Schedule 2, Part 1, Class A, paragraph A.4 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) for single storey rear extension at [site address] , Ham, [name] [postcode] in accordance with the application reference 24/2821/PDE and the details submitted with it including plans numbered 38LR/P01 pursuant to Article 3(1) and Schedule 2, Part 1, Class A, paragraph A.4(2).

Class A of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the GPDO (Class A) defines the enlargement or alteration of a dwellinghouse as permitted development. Clauses set out under paragraph A.1 within Class A identify when such works are not permitted development. The proposed extension would extend beyond the rear wall of the original dwellinghouse by more than 4 metres but by less than 6 metres. Therefore, while the proposal would not accord with clause A.1(f) it would comply with clause A.1(g) as a larger home extension.

As such, the conditions as laid out under part A.4 of Class A apply and information must be provided to the local planning authority on the proposed development. This appeal follows on from such an application.

While noting the Council’s refusal reasons, the main issue in this case is whether the appellant was notified of the Council’s decision on the application leading to this appeal within the prescribed period.

Having regard to sub-paragraph 10(b) under part A.4 of Class A, it is clear that the Council had 42 days from the date of receipt of the application to notify whether prior approval is given or refused, otherwise the proposed development could begin. The Council’s decision notice states the application was received on 11 November 2024 and it appears that this is accepted by the appellant. An email from the Council in response to this appeal suggests that a decision on the application was made on 23 December 2024 but this is refuted by the appellant who says they were not notified of a decision until 6 January 2025.

The decision notice itself is dated 6 January 2025. Also, the Council officer’s report on the application states it was printed off on 2 January 2025 with a date of 6 January 2025 at the end of the report. Accordingly, the contemporaneous evidence supports the appellant’s contentions on the date they were notified of the Council’s decision. As such, I conclude the decision was issued on the 56th day after the date the application was received by the Council and so beyond the expiry of the prescribed 42 day period.

The Council claims the proposed development would not comply with all of the conditions, limitations or restrictions that fall under part A.1 of Class A and so it would not constitute permitted development. However, the failure to issue a refusal within the prescribed period means that at this juncture I cannot address any questions as to whether the proposal would be permitted development.

For the above reasons, the appeal is allowed and prior approval is deemed to be granted. The appellant’s attention is brought to the conditions as set out under parts A.3 and A.4 of Class A.