Firstly, the inspector accepted that the council had erred in its enforcement notice in referring to the contravention as a "concrete base for a balcony" when the structure was of metal and timber, but he held this did not affect the efficacy of the notice as the main concern was about the principle of the balcony and not what materials it was made of. He concluded the appeal, on the ground that the alleged matter had not occurred as a matter of fact, failed in this regard.
Two previous appeals at the site for a similar structure had resulted in refusals, with the inspectors disagreeing about the level of harm arising from the balcony on the appearance of the host building. In the current appeal, the inspector concluded the 1.8m by 1.2m projection from a rear, second floor dormer did detract from the appearance of the house, appeared incongruous and was contrary to local and national policy promoting high quality design. The appeal on the deemed application also failed.
Inspector; D H Brier; Written representations
