The appellant had applied for a determination as to whether prior approval for the siting, design and external appearance of the building would be required in accordance with class A, part 6, schedule 2 of the General Permitted Development Order 1995. The council made a decision within the 28-day period allowed but failed to communicate it to the appellant, who claimed that it was therefore debarred from taking enforcement action.
The inspector agreed that the council was required to make and communicate its decision within the 28-day period and that since it had not done so, the appellant was entitled to erect the building in accordance with the plans submitted to the council. But he noted that the building differed in size and design from the plans that had been submitted.
Accordingly, it was not permitted development and enforcement action could be taken against it, he ruled. In upholding the enforcement notice, he concluded that the building harmed the character of the locality and could find no overriding justification for siting it in the position preferred by the appellant.
DCS No: 34136372; Inspector: Robin Muers; Hearing.