Appeal 3298626
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
1st floor extension to front elevation.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for 1st floor extension to front elevation at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 21/01716/FUL, dated 13 December 2021, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following
Section 03
conditions:
The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision.
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drawings [name].01, A.02, A.03 [name], A.04 [name], A.05 [name] and A.06 [name].
Section 04
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the appeal property and the surrounding area.
Section 05
Reasons
The appeal site is a modern two storey detached dwelling with a first floor pitched gable projection to the front elevation. The property is situated in a varied street scene which comprises a mixture of detached and semi detached dwellings of differing styles.
The extension would mirror the form, pitch and the ridge and eaves height of the existing front gable projection and would therefore be of a similar architectural character to the appeal property. The proposed front extension would run flush with the front of the existing gable and be seen as one projection spanning the width of the property. It would not therefore read as a prominent forward projection.
Whilst the first floor section would be finished in render, which is not a material finish currently found on the appeal property or within the immediate surroundings, it would not appear out of keeping on the host modern dwelling and would not detract from the varied street scene. I therefore conclude that the proposed extension would not harm the character and appearance of the appeal property and the surrounding area.
Accordingly, I find no conflict with those aims of [name] D4, D6, D7, D8, D9 and H6 of the Wolverhampton Unitary Development Plan (2006) and Policy ENV3 of the Black Country Core Strategy (2011) which, amongst other things, require proposals to be of a high quality design and to respond to the site and its context by having regard to matters including scale, height and massing. I also find no conflict with Supplementary Planning Guide 4 Extension to Houses (1996) which has similar objectives and indicates that extensions should be of a similar architectural character, style, scale and detailing as the existing house.
In addition to the standard implementation condition, it is necessary, in the interests of precision, to define the plans with which the scheme should accord. As the proposed external materials will differ from those currently found on the appeal property, I do not consider that a condition concerning external materials is required in this instance.
Section 06
Conclusion
For the reasons set out above, the appeal is allowed.
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 3499No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 20 July 2022Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 28 June 2022 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3298626
- Application reference
- 21/01716/FUL
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Wolverhampton City Council
- Planning authority code
- E08000031
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
- Not recorded
- 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
- 11 May 2022
- Valid date
- 11 May 2022
- Start date
- 19 May 2022
- Planning authority decision date
- 6 April 2022
- Appeal decision date
- 20 July 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
- 18088
- 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