Appeal 3319688
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
9 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
prior approval for the construction of one additional storey to the existing dwelling, to increase the height to a maximum height of 8.62 metres.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed, and prior approval is given under the provisions of Article 3(1) and Schedule 2, Part 1, Class AA of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) for the construction of one additional storey to the existing dwelling, to increase the height to a maximum height of 8.62 metres at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 23/0500M, dated 5 February 2023, and the plans submitted with it.
Section 03
Appeal Procedure
The site visit was undertaken by a representative of the Inspector whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal.
Section 04
Main Issue
The main issue is whether the proposal is permitted development.
Section 05
Reasons for the Recommendation
Under Article 3(1) and Schedule 2, Part 1, Class AA 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.
The GPDO states that development is not permitted by Class AA where it falls within descriptions as set out in sub-paragraphs AA.1 (a) to (k). It is common ground that the proposals accord with all of the above sub-paragraphs with the exception of sub-paragraph (d) and I have no reason to disagree with that
Section 06
assessment.
Sub-paragraph (d) sets out that development is not permitted by Class AA if ‘the existing dwellinghouse has been enlarged by the addition of one or more storeys above the original dwellinghouse, whether in reliance on the permission granted by Class AA or otherwise’. The GPDO definition of a ‘storey’, at paragraph AA4. (2 (b)), does not include any accommodation within the roof of a dwellinghouse, whether comprising part of the original dwellinghouse or created by a subsequent addition or alteration.
In considering what comprises an additional storey to the dwelling, I have had regard to the application and approved drawings from planning permission reference 06/0934P. From these drawings this development was a roof alteration including dormers, to create additional accommodation. Taking into account the definition of a storey set out at paragraph AA4.(2), I find that the existing accommodation within the roof space of the dwelling cannot be considered as an additional storey above the original dwellinghouse.
To that end, it is therefore considered that the proposal meets with all the requirements as set out in Schedule 2, Part 1, Class AA of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (as amended).
I also note that the Council have considered the relevant matters of prior approval in their officers’ report and have concluded that the proposal would be acceptable in terms of its external appearance, amenity considerations, air traffic/defence assets and protected views. I also concur with the Councils assessment in these respects.
Section 07
Conditions
The Council has provided as list of suggested conditions in the event that the appeal is allowed. However, these conditions duplicate the standard conditions as a set out in the GPDO and as such it is not necessary for me to impose in my decision. That said, in order for the proposal to benefit from the permitted development rights set out in the GPDO, all of the standard conditions set out at paragraphs AA.2 (2) and AA.2 (3)(b)-(e) must be complied with.
Section 08
Conclusion and Recommendation
For the reasons given above and having had regard to all other matters raised, I recommend that the appeal should be allowed, and prior approval should be granted. Ifeanyi Chukwujekwu APPEALS PLANNING OFFICER
Section 09
Inspector’s Decision
I have considered all the submitted evidence and my representative’s report and on that basis 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 2894No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 8 November 2023Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 25 July 2023 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3319688
- Application reference
- 23/0500M
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Cheshire East
- Planning authority code
- E06000049
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
- 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
- Not recorded
- 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
- 31 March 2023
- Valid date
- 31 March 2023
- Start date
- 11 July 2023
- Planning authority decision date
- 30 March 2023
- Appeal decision date
- 8 November 2023
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
- 41616
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:27
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21