Appeal 3347500
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
a two storey side and single storey rear extensions with internal alterations.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a two storey side and single storey rear extensions with internal alterations at [site address] , Blurton, [site address] [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 70663, 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 approved plans: Block and Location Plan, and JPK/23/5097/3 [name].
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
This is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area.
Section 04
Reasons
Located on the corner of [address] and [address], the property is a 2 storey semi-detached house. The property, and its adjoining pair, face the corner at a 45° angle, with dwellings on the south side of [address] and north of the property fronting directly onto the respective roads. The opposite corner of [address] contains another pair of corner facing semi-detached houses. The area is residential and suburban, with properties generally constructed from brick under hipped tiled roofs.
The proposal is for a 2 storey side extension and single storey rear extension. The 2 storey extension will project to the side, parallel with the front wall, before returning on an angle to meet the front building line of [address]. The rear extension will wrap around the back of the house, projecting around 2.3m from the rear wall.
Whilst the location on the corner is more prominent than other front facing dwellings, the design and layout of the 2 storey extension would respect the building lines and address both street frontages. It would be significantly set back from the front elevation, and coupled with the particularly subservient ridge height, would not be overbearing in the street scene.
Thus, the scale and massing would be appropriate and sympathetic, and this would not adversely affect the pattern of development. This is because the design of the proposal, even if an unconventional shape, would still enable the property to be read as a corner plot, with the front elevation remaining the focal point. It would be an effective use of land and would contribute positively to the character of the existing house and the wider area overall.
Therefore, the proposal would have an acceptable effect on the character and appearance of the area. This would comply with Policy CSP1 of the Newcastle-under-Lyme and [site address] [name] 2006-2026 (October 2009), which seeks to ensure new development is well designed, contributing positively to an areas identity in terms of scale, density and layout. There would also be compliance with the Newcastle-under-Lyme and [site address] Urban Design Guidance Supplementary Planning Document (December 2010), which seeks to guide well designed residential extensions, and the National Planning Policy Framework, which seeks to achieve well designed and beautiful places.
Section 05
Other matters
Concerns are raised that the proposal could result in loss of light and privacy. There are no windows proposed in the side elevation, and rear facing windows would overlook the rear garden of the appeal property. There may be a small reduction in direct afternoon or evening sunlight to the side elevation of [address], depending on the time of year. However, this would not result in unacceptably adverse living conditions for the occupiers of No 4 given daylight would still be able to pass through.
Section 06
Conditions
The plans are listed for certainty, and it would be necessary for the materials to match to ensure a suitable external appearance.
Section 07
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 1055No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 13 September 2024Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 9 September 2024 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3347500
- Application reference
- 70663
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Stoke-on-Trent City Council
- Planning authority code
- E06000021
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
- 1
- 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
- 4 July 2024
- Valid date
- 4 July 2024
- Start date
- 24 July 2024
- Planning authority decision date
- 26 April 2024
- Appeal decision date
- 13 September 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
- 57071
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:28
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21