Skip to main content
Official casework recordAllowedCurrent release

Appeal 3338860

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 first-floor rear extension.

  1. Section 02

    Decision

    The appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted for a first-floor rear extension at [site address] , [name] [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 2023/08596/PA, dated 17 December 2023, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following conditions: (1) The development herby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision. (2) The development hereby permitted shall be in accordance with the following approved plans: location plan, proposed block plan and drawing GA/01/29 rear first floor bathroom extension. (3) The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match those in the existing building. (4) The proposed rear window of the first-floor rear extension hereby permitted shall be fitted with a top-opener and obscure glazing. (5) Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no windows other than those expressly authorised by this permission shall be constructed on the rear elevation.

  2. Section 03

    Main Issue

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

  3. Section 04

    Reasons

    The appeal building is a two-storey semi-detached dwelling located in a residential area. It has been the subject of several previous extensions. The proposed extension is relatively small and would allow a bathroom of limited size to be improved. The Council considers that the proposal would have no adverse impact on the amenity of neighbours subject to conditions. I see no reason to disagree having regard to the relative orientation of the neighbouring properties.

    The proposed extension would not be seen from [address] and being at the rear of the dwelling would have no adverse impact on the street scene. Although the proposed flat roof would be out of character with the hipped roof form of the dwelling and others in [address] there is already a flat roof dormer at the rear elevation. A flat roof would ensure that the proposed extension would have a small visual impact and would not be significantly harmful or unduly dominant when viewed from neighbouring properties. The dwellings at [address] with windows which directly face the rear elevation of the appeal building would have a significant separation distance from the extension because of the intervening rear gardens. Whist the appeal building has been the subject of other extensions I consider that the extension proposed would not excessively unbalance the appearance of the pair of semi-detached dwellings of which it is part or constitute an over-development cumulatively because of its relatively small scale.

    I find that the proposal would not conflict with Birmingham Development Plan policy PG3 which seeks to ensure that all new development demonstrates high design quality and contributes to a strong sense of place. It would comply with the [name] as the extension would not negatively impact on the appearance of a property and surrounding area. It would also comply with the objectives of the National Planning Policy Framework regarding good design.

  4. Section 05

    Conditions

    In addition to the standard condition regarding the timescale for the development, a condition is added to confirm the approved plans. Matching external materials are required to protect the character and appearance of the building. Conditions are imposed to ensure that there is no opportunity for overlooking of neighbouring gardens from the proposed rear window. Permitted development rights are also restricted to prevent the insertion of any other windows.

  5. Section 06

    Conclusion

    For the reasons given 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 108No official casework-database value to compare
    Extracted site visit dates
    22 April 2024 (page 1)

Reference and authority

Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.

Case reference
3338860
Application reference
2023/08596/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
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
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
15 February 2024
Valid date
15 February 2024
Start date
1 March 2024
Planning authority decision date
14 February 2024
Appeal decision date
15 May 2024

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
51125
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