Single storey rear extension
📊
See the success rate & inspector analytics
Free to view — just create an account, no payment needed.
Sign Up FreeTechnical Issues Heatmap
Residential Amenity
Policy Weight
Extensions
Inspector’s Reasoning
Appeal Decision
Site visit made on 29 April 2025 by Sara Manson DipTP
Decision by John Morrison BA (Hons) MSc MRTPI
an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State
Decision date: 20 May 2025
Appeal Ref: APP/M0655/D/25/3363442
5 Lansdowne, Culcheth and Glazebury, Warrington WA3 4EA
• The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended)
against a refusal to grant planning permission.
• The appeal is made by Clearview Home Improvements Ltd against the decision of Warrington
Borough Council.
• The application Ref is 2025/00133/FULH.
• The development proposed is a single storey rear extension.
Decision
1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a single storey rear
extension at 5 Lansdowne, Culcheth and Glazebury, Warrington WA3 4EA in
accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 2025/00133/FULH, subject to the
following conditions:
1) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from
the date of this decision.
2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the
following approved plan: Proposed Plan & Elevations 150080125/2.
3) The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the
proposed development hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing
building.
Appeal Procedure and Main Issue
2. The site visit was undertaken by a representative of the Inspector whose
recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before
deciding the appeal. The main issue for which is the effect of the proposed
development on the living conditions of the occupiers of Number 7 Lansdowne (No.
7) with specific regard to light and outlook.
Reasons for the Recommendation
3. The adjoining property at No. 7 has a set of French doors that open on to its rear
garden, allowing light into the living room, only a small distance from the shared
solid timber fenced boundary. Consequently, the proposed extension would slightly
impinge guidance around the ’45 degree code’ set out in the House Extensions
Supplementary Planning Document 2021 (SPD). The SPD is guidance only and no
such rule is set out in the development plan policies provided. Given the height of
the existing boundary fence, along with the width and height of the French doors,
and a further source of light from the existing window in the front elevation, the
Appeal Decision APP/M0655/D/25/3363442
2
proposal would have only a marginal effect on the amount of morning light that
would reach the living room. It would, therefore, not cause the room to be
noticeably darker or significantly alter the outlook, which would be primarily over
what is otherwise an open, unincumbered and generously sized rear garden.
4. Any alleged lack of detail on the submitted plans has not hindered my ability to
assess the potential effects of the proposal based on its design, its slight set in
position relative to No. 7 and my observations on site. Therefore, the proposed
extension would not cause harm to the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers.
Consequently, it would accord with Policy DC6 of the Warrington Local Plan 2023,
which seeks to ensure development does not adversely impact the amenity of
neighbouring occupants amongst other things.
Conditions
5. In addition to the standard time period for commencement of the development, I
have attached a condition requiring it to accord with the approved plans, for
enforcement purposes. A condition requiring the use of materials matching that of
the existing building is also necessary to ensure an appropriate appearance.
Conclusion and Recommendation
6. The appeal scheme would comply with the development plan for the reasons I have
set out and there is nothing to suggest a decision other than in accordance
therewith. I therefore recommend the appeal is allowed, subject to the conditions
specified.
Sara Manson
APPEAL PLANNING OFFICER
Inspector’s Decision
7. I have considered all the submitted evidence and my representative’s report and on
that basis the appeal is allowed, subject to the conditions set out.
John Morrison
INSPECTOR
Expert Representation
Don't leave your appeal to chance.
Inspectors are inconsistent. We build a technical defense using precedents from our 182,000+ case archive.
No win, no fee Householder representation — you only pay if you win.