Appeal 3341858
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
7 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
first floor side & single storey rear extension.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for proposed first floor side & single storey rear extension at [site address] , Wolverhampton, [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 23/01362/FUL, subject to the following 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 following approved plans: 1314132/102B and 134123/105.
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.
Section 03
Main Issue
The effect of the development upon the character and appearance of [site address] and the surrounding area.
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal site is in an established residential area. Firsway consists of a mix of detached houses and bungalows. The appeal property is detached and set back from the pavement. The development would create a bedroom and bathroom to adjoin the existing side elevation at first floor level.
The appeal scheme was amended before the Council made its decision to provide a set back from the front elevation and set down from the original roof height of the property. The plans demonstrate that the development is also set in from the boundary with 14 Firsway resulting in a proportionate and subservient design to the host property. It does not detract from the character of [site address] nor the surrounding area.
The open character of the street scene is maintained due to the set back of the properties from the pavement. The natural incline of the road, the orientation and relationship of properties also ensures that the street does not feel enclosed. There is little uniformity on Firsway and the surrounding area due to the variation of design of the properties. Consequently, the development would not detract from the character and appearance of the surrounding area.
In conclusion, the development would not harm the character and appearance of the surrounding area nor [site address] . Accordingly, I find no conflict with policies ENV3 and CSP4 of the Black Country Core Strategy, Policies D4, D7, D8 and D9 of the Wolverhampton Unitary Development Plan and policy TNP12 [name] of the Tettenhall Neighbourhood Plan 2014-2016. These policies require a high level of design that assimilates with and respects the existing character of the surrounding area. For the same reasons the development accords with the Extension to Houses Supplementary Planning Guidance No 4 which seeks to ensure that domestic extensions are well designed.
Section 05
Other Matters
The Council has indicated that the site is adjacent to Wightwick Bank Conservation Area (the CA) in the Questionnaire and has provided a plan showing the extent of the CA. The appeal site is some distance from the boundary of the CA and there is intervening development such that the appeal site does not contribute to the significance of this heritage asset. Consequently, the development itself would not harm the significance of the CA as a designated heritage asset.
Objections to the appeal development have been made by an interested party. These include concerns about the effect of the appeal scheme on the appearance of the area which I have already dealt with. With regard to restrictions on the design of development at Firsway, including gaps between buildings for maintenance purposes, there is no evidence to demonstrate that these are subject to planning control. I also have limited information about the planning history of the garage at the appeal site. There is also no evidence to show that rainwater discharge cannot be properly contained within the appeal site. The devaluation of properties is not considered to be a material consideration and cannot be considered in the determination of this appeal.
Section 06
Conditions
A condition relating to materials, as set out in the application form, is necessary to ensure the development will assimilate with the host property.
Section 07
Conclusion
The material considerations do not indicate that a decision should be made other than in accordance with the development plan.
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 4725No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 13 June 2024Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 21 May 2024 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3341858
- Application reference
- 23/01362/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
- 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
- 2 April 2024
- Valid date
- 2 April 2024
- Start date
- 18 April 2024
- Planning authority decision date
- 20 March 2024
- Appeal decision date
- 13 June 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
- 52437
- 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