Appeal 6001051
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
single storey rear extension.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for single storey rear extension at [site address] , [site address] , Essex [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application Ref 25/00543/HOUSE and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following conditions:
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 2507-01; 2507-02; 2507-03; 2507-04; and 2507-05.
The external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall be constructed in the materials shown on plan no 2507-05.
Section 03
Preliminary Matters
During my site visit, I observed that construction of the rear extension had commenced and was largely complete. However, the works were not finished, as the facing materials on the elevations had yet to be applied. I have determined the appeal on this basis.
I have used the Council’s description of development, as the description within the planning application form is lengthy and includes extraneous details. However, I have taken out the reference to ‘retrospective’, as this is not a development type.
Section 04
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the extension on the living conditions of the occupiers of [address], with particular reference to outlook.
Section 05
Reasons
The appeal property is a two storey, semi-detached house located within a residential area. It previously had a small single storey rear projection which extended approximately half way along the appeal property’s rear elevation. The new rear extension infills the space between the historic projection and the shared garden boundary with [address] (No 1), the adjoining semi-detached property.
No 1 has large windows on its rear elevation, which serve a habitable room and provide views, primarily directed to the rear of its garden, rather than towards the boundary with the appeal property. The garden is relatively large and open, and due to the limited development beyond, provides a good level of outlook for its occupiers.
The extension creates new built form close to the shared garden boundary with No 1, which is marked by a wood panel fence. I appreciate that the extension projects 6 metres in depth and the Council indicate that it is 0.9 metres taller than the boundary fence. However, given its single storey form, flat roof design with set-back roof lantern and relatively low eaves height, it would not be unduly overbearing. Furthermore, its position is orientated at an angle to the neighbouring windows which direct views to the rear of No 1’s garden. Overall, I am not persuaded that the extension harmfully affects outlook or significantly increases a sense of enclosure for the neighbouring occupiers.
For these reasons the proposal would accord with policies D1 and H4 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan (2017) which collectively require that extensions are of an appropriate scale and design, and that residents have a quality living environment as a result of positive design. Additionally, it would accord with paragraph 135 of the Framework which requires that developments create places that are safe, inclusive and accessible and which promote health and well-being, with a high standard of amenity for existing and future users.
Section 06
Conditions
I have assessed the proposed planning conditions in regard to the advice provided in the National Planning Policy Guidance. I have imposed an approved plans condition in the interests of certainty. Similarly, in the interests of the character and appearance of the area, the external materials must be those shown in the submitted drawings. As the construction has already commenced, I have not imposed a condition requiring the development hereby permitted to begin within three years from the date of the decision.
Section 07
Conclusion
For the above reasons, and having had regard to all other matters raised, I conclude that the proposed development would accord with the development plan and the Framework. The appeal is therefore 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 3395No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 8 December 2025Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 20 November 2025 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 6001051
- Application reference
- 25/00543/HOUSE
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Maldon District Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000074
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
- Not recorded
- Appeal reason
- refused
- Type detail
- Householder
- Jurisdiction
- No Jurisdiction Associated
- Link status
- Not recorded
Site and development
Published appeal-site measurements and planning designations, without the withheld precise location fields.
- Site area
- 0 hectares
- Floor space
- 18 m²
- Number of residences
- Not recorded
- Site in Green Belt
- No
- Agricultural holding
- Not recorded
- Affects setting of a listed building
- Yes
- 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
- 12 October 2025
- Valid date
- 17 October 2025
- Start date
- 20 October 2025
- Planning authority decision date
- 26 September 2025
- Appeal decision date
- 8 December 2025
Case administration
Published recovery, call-in, costs and enforcement information for this case.
- Redetermined
- Not recorded
- Bespoke
- Not recorded
- 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
- Back Office
- Dataset status
- Current release
- Catalogue record ID
- 81072
- 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