Planning appeal decision
40 Rocastle Close, LIVERPOOL, L6 1PJ
permitted by the Order. Reasons 3. For the purposes of the 1990 Act uses and operations are lawful at any time if no enforcement action may then be taken in respect of them, and they do not constitute a contravention of any of the requirements of any enforcement notice then in force. 4. The development consists of a single storey extension to the dwelling, as described in Class A, and alterations to its roof, as described in Class B. From the plans before me and from observing the development it does not appear that the extensions have been constructed in a way contrary to any of the exceptions to either of those Classes (such as volumetric limits or proximity to Appeal
- Authority
- Liverpool City Council
- Appeal type
- ldc · Lawful Development Certificate
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- residential · Change of use
- Inspector
- Renaudon L
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Whether the development is described as permitted by article 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 by reference to Classes A and B of Part 1 of the Second Schedule to the Order
What decided it
The failure to comply with the material similarity conditions in Classes A and B of the General Permitted Development Order, as the exterior materials used (anthracite cladding, plain roof tiles, and white uPVC windows) were not of similar appearance to the existing dwellinghouse.
The main issues and the deciding factor are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.
®