Appeal 3371321
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 retrospective permission for dormer loft conversion.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a retrospective permission for dormer loft conversion at [site address] , [name], Warrington, [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application Ref 2025/00639/FULH and subject to the following condition:
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plan: PCE-Millin-July-22-Planning.
Section 03
Procedural Matter
The development the subject of this appeal has already taken place.
Section 04
[name]
The main issues in this case are the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the area; and its effect on the living conditions of the occupiers of Number [address], with regards to privacy.
Section 05
Character and appearance
The appeal property is a semi-detached bungalow. The appeal dwelling is set back from the road behind a paved parking area and has a garden to the rear.
The appeal property is located in a residential area characterised by the presence of a small number of semi-detached bungalows and, more commonly, two storey detached and semi-detached dwellings, set back from the road behind small front gardens and/or parking areas, and with longer gardens to the rear.
The presence of gardens and spaces between dwellings provides for a sense of spaciousness and greenery.
The appeal dwelling is situated close to a bend along [address]. Its rear garden backs on to the rear gardens of semi-detached bungalows located to the rear, whilst the northern side of the appeal property’s rear garden shares boundaries with the rear gardens of two storey dwellings located to the north.
This arrangement results in the rear elevation of the appeal dwelling being largely hidden from public view. Further, during my site visit, I observed that the presence of trees and planting provides considerable screening between dwellings in the area. Consequently, only glimpses of the side of the dormer can be observed from the public domain, and it does not appear prominently in its surroundings.
Further to the above, the dormer the subject of this appeal is no higher than, and is set in from, the sides of the host dwelling’s roof. As such, it appears subservient to the host dwelling, and it does not appear unduly dominant.
Taking all of the above into account, the development does not harm the character and appearance of the area, and is not contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework, to Policy DC6 of the Warrington Local Plan (2023) (Local Plan), or to the [address] Extensions Supplementary Planning Document (2021) (SPD), which, together amongst other things, seek to protect local character.
Section 06
Living conditions
During my site visit, I observed that the predominant presence of two storey dwellings combines with the juxtaposition of dwellings in the area to provide for a degree of overlooking. As noted above, the presence of trees and planting in the area provides screening between dwellings. This is particularly noticeable where gardens back on to one another, as is the case in respect of the appeal property and its neighbours.
Number [address] is located to the rear of, and offset to the side of, the appeal dwelling. During my site visit, I observed there to be a considerable distance between No 44’s closest rear-facing windows and the window of the dormer the subject of this appeal.
I find that the presence of gardens, boundary features and significant planting combines with the distance between the two dwellings, and their being off set to one another, to prevent harmful overlooking from arising between the development and No 44. Any overlooking that does occur is little different to the general overlooking that exists throughout the surrounding area to a non-harmful degree.
Taking all of the above into account, I find that the development does not harm the living conditions of the occupiers of Number [address] with regards to privacy, and is not contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework; to Policy ENV8 of the Local Plan, or to the Council’s SPD which, together amongst other things, seek to protect residential amenity.
Section 07
Conclusion
For the reasons given above, the appeal is successful.
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 601No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 21 October 2025Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 7 October 2025 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3371321
- Application reference
- 2025/00639/FULH
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Warrington Borough Council
- Planning authority code
- E06000007
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
- 25 m²
- 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
- Allowed
- Decision category
- Allowed
- Received date
- 18 August 2025
- Valid date
- 18 August 2025
- Start date
- 20 August 2025
- Planning authority decision date
- 24 July 2025
- Appeal decision date
- 21 October 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
- 78338
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:25
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:29
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:25
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21