Appeal 3285740
Public case and site metadata stored from the official casework database, including fields that were empty in the source release.
A clearer next step
See how Inspectors approached issues like yours
Bring your planning decision into a private workspace. We separate the disputed points, then match them with source-located Inspector reasoning from similar appeals.
- See which issues the decision appears to turn on
- Compare the facts and open the full appeal records
One private comparison
How the refusal review worksOne-off service · No subscription
Similar appeals are evidence to inspect, not a prediction of your outcome.
Official decision document
The decision, section by section
6 sections
Read the development description and the Inspector’s text from the official decision PDF in source order. Source headings are retained where available. Personal and contact details are removed by an automated privacy filter; this is source material, not Rules for You analysis.
Section 01
Development description
a loft conversion- roof design will change to a gable roof.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Procedural Matter
The Council’s evidence describes the appeal scheme as “installation of dormer window to rear with hip to gable roof alterations and roof lights to front’’. This more accurately identifies the proposed development and I have had regard to it in my decision.
Section 04
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area.
Section 05
Reasons
The appeal building is one half of a pair of semi detached two storey dwellings spanned by a hipped roof. The traditional symmetry of building pairs in the street scene, as a result of consistent design and roof form, contributes positively to the character and appearance of the area.
The alteration of one half of the roof to a gable end would noticeably unbalance the symmetry of the pair to the detriment of their presentation to the street scene. In addition, the large scale of the proposed dormer and its resulting visual dominance of the rear roof plane would make the building appear top heavy and further differentiate it from its adjoined neighbour.
The appeal scheme would therefore cause harm to the existing building and subsequently the character and appearance of the area. It would thus conflict with Policy PG3 of the Birmingham Development Plan (2017) and saved paragraphs 3.14 C-D of the Birmingham Unitary Development Plan (2005) which seek to ensure that design responds to the character of the local area. It would also be contrary to the advice in the ‘Extending Your Home’ Supplementary Planning Document (2007) regarding dormer windows, which states that dormers must not be so big that they dominate the roof.
The proposed development would also be contrary to the principles within Chapter 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2021 which seek good design sympathetic to the local area.
My attention has been drawn to other similar roof extensions in the area. However, these are in the minority and the circumstances of each proposal are likely to be different. In any event, the fact that similar roof extensions exist in the area is not a reason, on its own, to allow unacceptable development in the above context. I have considered this appeal on its own merits and concluded that it would cause harm for the reasons set out above.
Section 06
Conclusion
The development conflicts with the development plan. There are no material considerations worthy of sufficient weight that would indicate a decision otherwise than in accordance with it. The appeal is therefore dismissed.
Planning inspector and document dates
The official casework attribution is grouped under a one-way keyed hash and shown only by its local identifier. Decision-letter dates and page references are extracted by fixed first-page rules and checked against that authoritative record.
Appeal Decision
- Extracted inspector · page 1
- Inspector attribution ID 2436No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 22 December 2021Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 14 December 2021 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3285740
- Application reference
- 2021/06550/PA
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Birmingham City Council
- Planning authority code
- E08000025
Casework details
The casework, procedure, development and linking details supplied by the official record.
- Casework type
- Householder (HAS)
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development type
- Householder developments
- Appeal type reason
- 1. Refused planning permission
- Appeal reason
- Refusal
- Type detail
- Planning Appeals - Full
- Jurisdiction
- Transferred
- Link status
- Not Linked
Site and development
Published appeal-site measurements and planning designations, without the withheld precise location fields.
- Site area
- Not recorded
- Floor space
- 25 m²
- Number of residences
- 1
- Site in Green Belt
- No
- Agricultural holding
- No
- Affects setting of a listed building
- Not recorded
- Historic building grant made
- Not recorded
- Relates to a conservation area
- Not recorded
- Flooding is an issue
- Not recorded
- Site within an AONB
- Not recorded
- Site within an SSSI
- Not recorded
Decision and dates
The published outcome and every imported case date.
- Official decision
- Dismissed
- Decision category
- Dismissed
- Received date
- 28 October 2021
- Valid date
- 28 October 2021
- Start date
- 10 November 2021
- Planning authority decision date
- 15 September 2021
- Appeal decision date
- 22 December 2021
Case administration
Published recovery, call-in, costs and enforcement information for this case.
- Redetermined
- No
- Bespoke
- No
- Date recovered
- Not recorded
- Date not recovered or derecovered
- Not recorded
- Call-in date
- Not recorded
- Costs applied for
- Not recorded
- Enforcement grounds count
- Not recorded
- Enforcement grounds
- Not recorded
Source and catalogue history
When this record appeared in the rolling official release and when the catalogue stored it.
- Source
- Planning Inspectorate casework database
- Source data system
- Horizon
- Dataset status
- Current release
- Catalogue record ID
- 8135
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:25
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21