Prior notification for single storey rear extension with overall height not exceeding 4m and depth of not exceeding 4m. Eaves height will not exceed 3m in height

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 4 February 2025 by Samuel Watson BA (Hons) MSc MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 21 February 2025 Appeal Ref: APP/E5330/D/24/3348766 53 Southend Crescent, Greenwich, Eltham SE9 2SD • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) against a refusal to grant approval required under Article 3(1) and Schedule 2, Part 1, Class A of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended). • The appeal is made by Peter Zielinski against the decision of Royal Borough of Greenwich. • The application Ref is 24/1846/PN1. • The development proposed is a prior notification for single storey rear extension with overall height not exceeding 4m and depth of not exceeding 4m. Eaves height will not exceed 3m in height. Materials used to construct rear extension will match an existing building. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Procedural Matter 2. The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 as amended (the GPDO) sets out under Schedule 2, Part 1, Class A.1(g)(i) that, subject to restrictions, dwellinghouses can be extended by up to 6 metres. However, paragraph A.4 requires a prior approval application to be made to the local planning authority and condition 10 of A.4 is clear that, the development cannot begin until one of three events occur. 3. These events are namely, (a) the developer receives written notice that prior approval is not required; (b) the developer receives written notice that prior approval is given; or (c) the expiry of 42 days following the application being received by the local planning authority without notification of the prior approval being granted or refused. In this case I understand a notice was issued refusing prior approval within the 42 day limit. 4. However, at the time of my visit I noted that the proposed extension had been carried out, contrary to condition 10 of paragraph A.4 of Class, A, Part 1, Schedule 2 of the GPDO. As a result, and irrespective of whether the complies with the other criteria of Class A, the appeal must be dismissed and prior approval refused. Conclusion 5. For the reasons given above the appeal is dismissed. Samuel Watson INSPECTOR