Skip to main content
Rules for YouPlanning, made clearerMenu
Official casework recordDismissedCurrent release

Appeal 3363982

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

5 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

described as ‘single storey ground floor pitched roof rear extension and internal refurbishment works’.

  1. Section 02

    Decision

    The appeal is dismissed.

  2. Section 03

    Main Issue

    The main issue is whether the appeal proposal constitutes development permitted under the provisions of Schedule 2, Part 1, Class A of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) (the GPDO).

  3. Section 04

    Reasons

    Under Article 3(1) and Schedule 2, Part 1, Class A of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) (the GPDO), planning permission is granted for the enlargement of a dwellinghouse subject to limitations and conditions.

    The Council’s concerns in this case centre on whether the proposal meets the limitations in paragraph A.1(j), which states that development is not permitted if the enlarged part of the dwellinghouse would extend beyond a wall forming a side elevation of the original dwellinghouse, and would (i) exceed 4 metres in height, (ii) have more than a single storey, or (iii) have a width greater than half the width of the original dwellinghouse.

    The appeal dwelling is a mid-terrace which has a part two-storey part single storey rear outrigger. The single storey part of the outrigger has a lean-to-roof. The proposed extension would infill the gap between the existing outrigger and the boundary with No [address]. It would also change the roof of the single storey element of the outrigger to a pitched roof. Although the proposed extension would not be a full height wraparound extension, at the roof level it would be L-shaped.

    The proposed extension would extend beyond the flank wall of the original rear outrigger which is a wall forming a side elevation of the original dwellinghouse. Moreover, where the roof form of the single storey element would be altered, the proposed extension would have a width greater than half the width of the original dwellinghouse. For these reasons, the proposed extension would fail to comply with A.1(j)(iii) of Class A of the GDPO.

    I acknowledge the appellant’s argument about the ‘original rear wall’, as outlined within the appeal decision1 and the similarities between the appeal proposal and the approved drawings for a prior approval application2. The appellant also asserts that the new roof would be an extension permitted under Class B of the GDPO. However, I have assessed the appeal proposal against the limitations and conditions set out within Class A of the GPDO. Therefore, the factors outlined by the appellant have not altered my assessment of the appeal proposal.

    As the proposal would not comply with the condition set out under A.1(j)(iii), the proposed extension would not be granted planning permission by Class A of the GPDO.

  4. Section 05

    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 5462No official casework-database value to compare
    Extracted decision date · page 1
    23 July 2025Matches the official casework database
    Extracted site visit dates
    7 July 2025 (page 1)

Reference and authority

Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.

Case reference
3363982
Application reference
115184/PAH/24
Lead case reference
Not recorded
Planning authority
Trafford Metropolitan Borough Council
Planning authority code
E08000009

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
3. Refused prior approval of permitted development rights
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
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
Dismissed
Decision category
Dismissed
Received date
11 April 2025
Valid date
16 April 2025
Start date
16 April 2025
Planning authority decision date
22 January 2025
Appeal decision date
23 July 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
73503
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
Back to appeals databaseRequest a correction or privacy review