Skip to main content
Official casework recordAllowedCurrent release

Appeal 3295415

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

a single storey front extension.

  1. Section 02

    Decision

    The appeal is allowed and permission is granted for a single storey front extension at [site address] , in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 2021/09967/PA, dated 22 November 2021, subject to the attached schedule of conditions.

  2. Section 03

    Main Issue

    The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the street scene.

  3. Section 04

    Reasons

    The proposal is for a modest single storey extension to the front elevation of No 141, a detached house at the end of [address], a modern estate of detached and semi-detached properties. The extension would square off the front of the house, bringing the living room forward by about 1.5 m to sit alongside the projecting porch and integral garage. These were part of an earlier part-two/part-single storey extension to the property.

    Whilst the proposal would result in a full width single storey extension across the front of the property and there are no other examples in the vicinity, the house is set well back from the road behind a grass verge next to a projecting garage attached to the adjacent semi-detached house. In this context the proposal would not appear intrusive or out of place and as a detached property no discordant lack of symmetry would arise. In fact the front elevation of the house would appear a more unified design.

    One common design characteristic of the estate is the series of distinctive four panel front bay windows to the ground floor living rooms. In this setting the proposal would include an incongruous three panel bay window but the details of the window could be reconsidered by attaching a suitable condition.

    For these reasons the proposal would not adversely affect the character and appearance of the street scene and would comply with Policy PG3 of the Birmingham Development Plan 2017 and Policy DM2 of the Development Management in [name] 2021. These require new development to demonstrate high design quality, reinforcing a sense of place, and to be appropriate to its location. The proposal would also comply with the [name] 2007 by improving the appearance of the house.

    The Council suggested three conditions should the appeal be allowed. In addition to the standard time limit for commencement, conditions are required to define the approved plans in the interests of certainty and to control the external materials to ensure the satisfactory appearance of the development. A further condition is required to control the details of the front bay window for the reasons given above.

  4. Section 05

    Conclusion

    Having regard to the above the appeal should be allowed.

  5. Section 06

    Schedule of conditions

    The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this decision.

    The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Existing Site & Block Plan ED21-066-EB [name] & Block Plan ED21-066-PB [name] ED21-066-02 [name] ED21-066-03 [name] ED21-066-02 [name] ED21-066-04 [name]

    Notwithstanding the approved plans, the design and construction details of the bay window shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to its installation. The bay window shall then be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

    The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing building.

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 1064No official casework-database value to compare
    Extracted decision date · page 1
    24 May 2022Matches the official casework database
    Extracted site visit dates
    18 May 2022 (page 1)

Reference and authority

Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.

Case reference
3295415
Application reference
2021/09967/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
5 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
Allowed
Decision category
Allowed
Received date
23 March 2022
Valid date
23 March 2022
Start date
8 April 2022
Planning authority decision date
14 January 2022
Appeal decision date
24 May 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
15657
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