Appeal 3286178
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
5 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
alterations and rear extension to dwellinghouse.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for alterations and rear extension to dwellinghouse at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 21/03062/FUL, dated 30 July 2021, subject to the following conditions:
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Location Plan, 18/310 A3 003 and 18/310 A1 002A.
Section 03
[name]
The application for the proposal was submitted retrospectively, and development including a rear extension was in place at the time of my visit.
Section 04
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and the wider area.
Section 05
Reasons
The appeal site is a semi-detached bungalow located in the small housing estate of Shoresdean. Although there is some variation in the design of the dwellings, the roof-forms are relatively consistent and give this group of dwellings a pleasing conformity.
The Council expresses concern about the flat-roofed design of the proposal. However, the extension is located to the rear of the property and is not prominent in views from the public realm to the front of the site. I also saw that there were a variety of extensions and outbuildings to the rear of nearby properties, including some with flat roofs. Whilst they may not be of the same scale or nature as the appeal proposal, the extension does not appear to be unduly large or incongruous within that context or in respect of the host building, including in views from the wider area to the rear of the site.
The appellant also emphasises that the extension only marginally exceeds the property’s permitted development rights. Based on the evidence before me, a flat roofed extension of a similar scale and location to the appeal proposal could be constructed as permitted development, and I give this significant weight as a fallback position in favour of the appeal.
I conclude that the proposal would not harm the character and appearance of the host dwelling or the wider area. The proposal would therefore not conflict with policy F3 of the [site address] Local Plan 1999 in respect of being in accordance with its surroundings, or the National Planning Policy Framework in respect of achieving well-designed places.
There are no material considerations that indicate the application should be determined other than in accordance with the development plan. For the reasons given above, I therefore conclude that the appeal should be allowed. I have not imposed a condition in respect of the commencement of development due to the retrospective nature of the appeal. I have imposed a condition requiring the development to be carried out in accordance with the submitted plans in the interests of certainty.
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 92No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 10 February 2022Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 1 February 2022 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3286178
- Application reference
- 21/03062/FUL
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Northumberland County Council
- Planning authority code
- E06000057
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
- Unknown
- 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
- 23 m²
- Number of residences
- 0
- 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
- Allowed
- Decision category
- Allowed
- Received date
- 4 November 2021
- Valid date
- 4 November 2021
- Start date
- 10 November 2021
- Planning authority decision date
- 7 October 2021
- Appeal decision date
- 10 February 2022
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
- 10403
- 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