Skip to main content
Official casework recordAllowedCurrent release

Appeal 3326698

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

part subterranean single storey and part two storey side extension.

  1. Section 02

    Decision

    The appeal is allowed. Planning permission is granted for part subterranean single storey and part two storey side extension at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application Ref 23/02950/FU dated 13 May 2023 subject to the following conditions:

    The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision.

    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.

    The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Location Plan, 01, 02, 03, 04 & 05.

    The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the window within the west facing elevation of the extension serving bedroom No. 4 has been fitted with obscured glazing, and no part of that window that is less than 1.7 metres above the floor of the room shall be capable of being opened. Details of the type of obscured glazing shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the window is installed and once installed the obscured glazing shall be retained thereafter.

  2. Section 03

    Procedural Matter

    The description of the proposal has changed from that on the application form. [name] note the clarity provided within the Council description, that on the application form is not deficient in describing what is proposed and I have considered the proposal on that basis.

  3. Section 04

    Reasons

    The proposal relates to a semi detached residential dwelling set back from the verdant [address] and accessed from [address] which spurs off from that road. The evidence indicates that the property has been previously extended through a two storey side and other extensions. It appears that the adjoining semi at [address] has also been extended with a similar two storey side extension. Therefore, the two semi detached properties have a broadly similar appearance in terms of their bulk, design, and massing.

    The proposed extension when considered cumulatively with that existing would see the total extensions to the side being wider than the original dwelling. However, due to their substantial set back from [address] and the characteristic trees and hedges that line that street which obscure views towards the properties from both directions, the semi detached properties are not at all prominent within the street scene from [address].

    There would be some visibility from [address], although this appears to principally form a cul-de-sac access to a limited number of properties. There are also subtle materials and other differences for example the front porch at the appeal property which serve to limit the symmetrical appearance of the semi-detached dwellings. The extension would retain a degree of subservience through adopting and extending the set down ridgeline of the previous extension from the ridgeline on the main body of the house.

    For these reasons the extension would not therefore form a dominant or incongruous feature and would not harm the character and appearance of the area.

    I am aware of SPD1 guidance relating to two storey side extensions. It advises that generally they should not exceed two thirds of the width of the main house. The use of the word generally appears to indicate that there may be some specific scenarios where it may not be necessary to stick rigidly to this guidance. I consider this to be once such scenario.

    There would therefore be no conflict with policies P10 of the [name] (2019), saved policies GP5 and BD6 of the Leeds Unitary Development Plan Review (2006) or Policy HDG1 of the SPD. Amongst other things, these policies and guidance require proposals of good design that respect the scale, form, detailing and materials of the original building whilst respecting the character and appearance of the locality.

  4. Section 05

    Conditions

    Planning permission is granted subject to the standard three-year time limit. A condition requiring matching materials is necessary in the interests of the character and appearance of the area. It is necessary that the development be carried out in accordance with the approved plans for the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of certainty.

    Further, details of obscure glazing to the west facing window of bedroom No. 4 are necessary in the interests of the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers closely to the west. 1 Leeds City Council – [name] – Supplementary Planning Document – April 2012.

  5. Section 06

    Conclusion

    There is nothing to indicate that the decision should me made otherwise than in accordance with the development plan. The appeal is therefore 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 6752No official casework-database value to compare
    Extracted decision date · page 1
    30 October 2023Matches the official casework database
    Extracted site visit dates
    23 October 2023 (page 1)

Reference and authority

Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.

Case reference
3326698
Application reference
23/02950/FU
Lead case reference
Not recorded
Planning authority
Leeds City Council
Planning authority code
E08000035

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
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
26 July 2023
Valid date
26 July 2023
Start date
2 August 2023
Planning authority decision date
7 July 2023
Appeal decision date
30 October 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
41077
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