Understanding planning · 13 min read
Planning application documents: what to read first
Understand planning application documents, officer reports and decision notices. Use a reading checklist, document table and worked example to inspect a case.
Application overview
Erection of a two storey rear and first floor side extension
Proposal details
- Reference
- CH/24/024
- Ward
- Etching Hill and The Heath
- Parish
- Brindley Heath CP
- Agent
- Rob Duncan
- UPRN
- 200003093740
Sign in to view all collected council fields and recorded changes.
Sign in to view collected detailsDocuments 20 of 20
| Document | Published | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Refused 14.3.24 - Site Location PlanPREFDWG | 26 Jan 2024 | View |
| Refused 14.3.24 - Existing Block PlanPREFDWG | 26 Jan 2024 | View |
| Refused 14.3.24 - Proposed Block PlanPREFDWG | 26 Jan 2024 | View |
| Refused 14.3.24 - Existing Floor PlanPREFDWG | 26 Jan 2024 | View |
| Refused 14.3.24 - Proposed Floor PlanPREFDWG | 26 Jan 2024 | View |
| Refused 14.3.24 - Existing ElevationsPREFDWG | 26 Jan 2024 | View |
| Refused 14.3.24 - Proposed ElevationsPREFDWG | 26 Jan 2024 | View |
| Refused 14.3.24 - Proposed Front ViewPREFDWG | 26 Jan 2024 | View |
| Application Form - RedactedPAPPFRM | 26 Jan 2024 | View |
| Refused 14.3.24 - Bat ReportPREFDWG | 26 Jan 2024 | View |
| Refused 14.3.24 - Parking DetailsPREFDWG | 26 Jan 2024 | View |
| Refused 14.3.24 - Planning StatementPREFDWG | 26 Jan 2024 | View |
| Brindley Heath PC commentsPCONSULT | 1 Feb 2024 | View |
| Ecology Officer commentsPCONSULT | 2 Feb 2024 | View |
| Refused 14.3.24 - Plan of treesPREFDWG | 8 Feb 2024 | View |
| Ecology Officer further commentsPCONSULT | 13 Feb 2024 | View |
| Officer ReportPOFFREP | 14 Mar 2024 | View |
| Decision NoticePDECNOT | 14 Mar 2024 | View |
| Appeal - Start letterAAPPSTAR | 24 Jun 2024 | View |
| Appeal decision noticeAPPDEC | 15 Oct 2024 | View |
Documents open on the council website. Browse council documents if a link has changed.
Application timeline
Council milestones and published deadlines. A deadline passing does not confirm a decision.
Publicity end date
Past published deadlineA published target or deadline. It does not confirm an outcome.
Council sourceSite notice end date
Past published deadlineA published target or deadline. It does not confirm an outcome.
Council sourceDecision due date
Past published deadlineA published target or deadline. It does not confirm an outcome.
Council source
Decision & conditions
Decision Notice Appeal decision noticePlanning conditions
- In accordance with paragraph (38) of the National Planning Policy Framework the Local Planning Authority has worked with the applicant in a positive and proactive manner to approve the proposed development. However, in this instance the proposal fails to accord with the Local Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). 1. The site is located within the West Midlands Green Belt wherein there is a presumption against inappropriate development which should only be approved where very special circumstances have been demonstrated to exist. The proposed extensions, by reason of the scale, mass and design would result in disproportionate additions over and above the original building. As such, the proposal would have a materially greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt and therefore constitutes inappropriate development in the Green Belt contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework paragraph 154 (c). Furthermore, no very special circumstances have been demonstrated to justify approval of the extension. 2. The site is located within Cannock Chase National Landscape (formerly Cannock Chase Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty). The site is overtly visible to the public realm from both the highway and the public footpaths within the Cannock Chase National Landscape located close to the application site. The application site occupies a prominent position at the end of a row of 4 dwellings that retain a similar appearance and scale. The extensions proposed, by reason of the design, scale and mass would result in an incongruous addition to the host dwelling and would be at odds with the wider street scene. As such, the proposal would result in an adverse impact to the AONB. Therefore, the proposed development would have a detrimental impact on the character and form of the area and Cannock Chase National Landscape. The proposal therefore fails to accord with paragraph 182 of the National planning Policy Framework, which outlines that planning decisions should protect valued landscapes and that great weight should be given to conserving scenic beauty within National Landscapes. 3. The proposed extension would be contrary to the Councils Design Supplementary Planning Document, as it, by reason of its projecting design and scale, fails to appear subordinate to the existing dwelling. As such, the proposed development would have a detrimental impact on the character and form of the host dwelling and wider street scene. The proposal therefore fails to accord with paragraph 135(b) of the National Planning Policy framework and CP3 of the Cannock Chase Local Plan.
