Skip to main content
Rules for YouPlanning, made clearerMenu
Official casework recordDismissedCurrent release

Appeal 3293873

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 works

One-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

the demolition of existing rear extension and new 8m rear extension.

  1. Section 02

    Decision

    The appeal is dismissed.

  2. Section 03

    Preliminary Matters

    Under Article 3(1) and Schedule 2, Part 1, Class A of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) (the GPDO) planning permission is granted for the enlargement of a dwellinghouse subject to limitations and conditions.

    Where an application is made for a determination as to whether prior approval is required for development which exceeds the limits in paragraph A.1(f) but is allowed by paragraph A.1(g) to Part 1, paragraph A.4(3) provides that the local planning authority may refuse the application where it considers that the proposed development does not comply; or that the developer has provided insufficient information to enable the authority to establish whether the proposed development complies with the conditions, limitations or restrictions that are applicable to such permitted development.

    In the case that the development is permitted development, paragraph A.4(7) to Part 1 requires the local planning authority to assess the impact of the proposed development on the amenity of all adjoining premises, taking into account any representations received. I have considered the appeal on that basis.

  3. Section 04

    [name]

    The main issues are whether the proposed development would be permitted under the GPDO and if so the acceptability of the impact on the amenity of adjoining premises, having particular regard to outlook.

  4. Section 05

    Reasons

    Development is not permitted by Schedule 2, Part 1, Class A, paragraph (g) (i) of the above Order if the enlarged part of the dwellinghouse would extend beyond a wall forming a rear elevation of the original dwellinghouse by more than 8m in the case of a detached dwellinghouse. The term ‘original’ is defined in the GPDO as that which existed on 1 July 1948 or, if built after that date, as so built.

    The Council assert that the existing single storey projection to the rear of the property is an extension that projects from a part of the original house that was set behind the main rear elevation.

    I observed during my site visit a variation in the brickwork to the side elevation of the dwelling, indicating to me that the rear wall of the original dwelling could have been altered at some point. I have not been presented with strong evidence to the contrary which demonstrates that the Council’s assertion is incorrect.

    Based on the information before me it is therefore reasonable to conclude that the development would result in the enlargement of the dwellinghouse by more than 8m beyond the original rear wall. I therefore conclude that the proposed extension would not be permitted development under the above Order.

    As the proposal does not constitute permitted development, it is not necessary for me to assess the impacts on the neighbouring living conditions, or the application of planning policy related to those matters.

  5. Section 06

    Conclusion

    For the reasons given above, the appeal is 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 3016No official casework-database value to compare
    Extracted decision date · page 1
    9 December 2022Matches the official casework database
    Extracted site visit dates
    1 November 2022 (page 1)

Reference and authority

Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.

Case reference
3293873
Application reference
21/03257/HPN
Lead case reference
Not recorded
Planning authority
Bedford Borough Council
Planning authority code
E06000055

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
3. Refused prior approval of permitted development rights
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
Not recorded
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 February 2022
Valid date
28 February 2022
Start date
6 April 2022
Planning authority decision date
24 January 2022
Appeal decision date
9 December 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
24857
First seen
20 August 2026 at 14:24
Last seen
20 August 2026 at 16:26
Removed from release
Not recorded
Record created
20 August 2026 at 14:24
Record updated
24 August 2026 at 16:21
Back to appeals databaseRequest a correction or privacy review