Appeal 3354581
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
double storey side extension, single storey rear extension, loft conversion and internal alterations to an existing dwelling.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Preliminary Matters
During the planning application process, amended plans were requested and received by the Council which were used to determine the application. I have similarly determined the appeal on the basis of these amended plans.
The Council has no objections to the single storey rear extension and the loft conversion. I have no reason to disagree with the Council in this respect. My report therefore concentrates on the matter in dispute between the parties, namely the double storey side extension.
Section 04
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area.
Section 05
Reasons
The host dwelling is a semi-detached property, set back from the highway in a predominantly residential area. The area is characterised by a mix of dwelling types with semi-detached dwellings to the side and terraced properties opposite. The regular spacing between the semi-detached dwellings gives a regular rhythm and uniform appearance to the street scene. Adjacent to the property is the Victoria Park Christian Fellowship building which sits at the corner of [address] and [address].
The plot is an irregular space being narrower to the front, and wider to the rear. The amended plans show the proposed two storey extension would be the same width throughout its length. It would extend the full width of the site at the front of the property, and it would be set back from the front elevation.
The neighbouring church building is taller than the host dwelling and set back from the shared boundary. The extension would be closer to the church building and although a small gap would remain, it would substantially diminish the space between the buildings reducing the appearance of spaciousness between them. This would be exacerbated by the two-storey nature of the extension. The spaces between buildings are an important characteristic of the area and the proposed extension would therefore be an intrusive and dominant feature in the area.
For the above reasons the proposal would harm the character and appearance of the area. It would conflict with [name] 1, DM 1 and EN 1 of the [name] 2012 and Policy DC1 of the Unitary Development Plan which together and amongst other matters seek to ensure that development has regard to the character of the surrounding area with particular regard to its scale and appearance and protects and enhances the built environment.
Section 06
[name]
I note the appellant’s concerns regarding the Council’s handling of the case. However, this is a matter that would need to be taken up with the Council in the first instance. In determining this appeal, I am only able to have regard to the planning merits of the appeal.
Section 07
Conclusion
For the reasons given above the appeal should be dismissed.
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 20592No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 23 June 2025Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 4 March 2025 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3354581
- Application reference
- 140638/FH/2024
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Manchester City Council
- Planning authority code
- E08000003
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
- No
- Affects setting of a listed building
- No
- Historic building grant made
- No
- Relates to a conservation area
- No
- Flooding is an issue
- No
- Site within an AONB
- No
- Site within an SSSI
- No
Decision and dates
The published outcome and every imported case date.
- Official decision
- Dismissed
- Decision category
- Dismissed
- Received date
- 28 October 2024
- Valid date
- 30 October 2024
- Start date
- 6 November 2024
- Planning authority decision date
- 7 October 2024
- Appeal decision date
- 23 June 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
- No
- 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
- 71657
- 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