Appeal 3350344
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
the proposed extension of the existing rear first floor balcony.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the proposed extension of the existing rear first floor balcony at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application reference 241050, 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: Existing and proposed plans and elevations, location and layout plan – [name] 01
The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing balcony.
Section 03
[name]
The main issues are the effect of the proposal on a) the character and appearance of the host building and local area; and b) the living conditions of the occupants of neighbouring residences in respect of overlooking.
Section 04
Character and appearance
The appeal site comprises a two-storey, detached dwelling with off-street parking on a driveway to the front. It is located in a cul-de-sac of other residential properties.
The appeal property includes an existing first floor balcony that looks out over the rear garden and countryside beyond. It is of diminutive scale, with very limited views of the development from the public domain or the amenity spaces of surrounding residences, primarily [address]. _________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________
Whilst the proposal would enlarge the balcony, to all intents and purposes only the south-facing privacy screen would become more immediately evident from the garden of [address]. Nonetheless, the extent of this screen would be modest, and an adequate separation distance between the houses would remain.
From further afield, the glazed appearance of the balcony would not appear overly prominent or discordant, being set against the backdrop of the built form of the main dwelling. I am therefore satisfied that it would assimilate with the house and its setting.
Consequently, I conclude that the scheme would not result in a detrimental impact upon the character and appearance of the host building and local area. It would comply with Policies DM13 and DM15 of the Colchester Borough Local Plan 2022 (LP), which seek to secure development of an acceptable scale and design. It would also be consistent with the advice in the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework), which states that good design is a key aspect of sustainable development.
Section 05
Living conditions
The position of the proposed balcony relative to no.[address] would allow for the overlooking of the rear garden of this neighbouring property. However, the inclusion of appropriately-placed obscure glazed screens would provide privacy for both users of the balconies and neighbouring occupiers.
The development would create views over the very end of the long rear gardens belonging to dwellings on [address], still such areas are less sensitively located than, for example, patios immediately to the rear of habitable rooms. To my mind, the impact would not be so harmful as to warrant a refusal of permission on this ground. There would also be direct overlooking of the agricultural land to the east, however this is not residential amenity space and as such I afford any concerns limited weight.
I find that there would be no adverse effect upon the living conditions of the occupants of neighbouring residences in respect of overlooking. The scheme would meet Policies DM13 and DM15 of the LP and the Framework in relation to the protection of amenity.
Section 06
Conditions
I have considered the imposition of conditions in light of advice in Planning Policy Guidance and the National Planning Policy Framework. In addition to the standard implementation condition, the approved plans are listed for certainty. A condition requiring external materials to match those on the existing balcony would provide for a satisfactory appearance.
Section 07
Conclusion
Given the above arguments and all other issues, I allow the appeal.
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 212No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 8 January 2025Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 18 December 2024 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3350344
- Application reference
- 241050
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Colchester Borough Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000071
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
- 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
- 19 August 2024
- Valid date
- 19 August 2024
- Start date
- 16 September 2024
- Planning authority decision date
- 17 July 2024
- Appeal decision date
- 8 January 2025
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
- 62554
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:25
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:28
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:25
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21