Appeal 3276111
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
9 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 single storey rear extension.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a single storey rear extension at [site address] , [site address] [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 21/00812/HFUL, dated 21 February 2021, subject to the following conditions:
The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision.
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Location Plan, SF 07 063.3 and SF 07 063.2.
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.
No development shall commence until a scheme of landscaping has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall provide for the retention and management of the existing hedgerow and vegetation along the western boundary of the site adjacent to the public right of way. The scheme shall include indications of all existing trees and hedgerows, identify those to be retained and set out measures for their protection throughout the course of development. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details.
Section 03
Appeal Procedure
The site visit was undertaken by an Appeal Planning Officer whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal.
Section 04
[name]
The Government published a revised version of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) on 20 July 2021. [name] have had regard to the revised Framework as a material consideration in my decision-making, planning decisions must still be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this instance, the issues most relevant to the appeal remain unaffected by the revisions to the Framework. I am therefore satisfied that there is no requirement to seek further submissions on the revised Framework, and that no party would be disadvantaged as a result.
Section 05
Main Issue
The main issue in the appeal is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and the surrounding area.
Section 06
Reasons for the Recommendation
The appeal site is occupied by a two-storey detached dwelling with an attached garage and a conservatory to either side. There is also an outbuilding on the site adjacent to the highway. The proposal would introduce a single storey extension to the rear of the property. This would cover the full width of the dwelling with a depth of 8 metres.
The proposed extension would cover a large footprint when compared to the size of the original dwelling. However, due to its single storey height, the use of matching materials and a simple design, it would be in keeping with the host dwelling and would be an appropriate addition in terms of its form and appearance.
Due to the location of the proposal to the rear of the host dwelling and the presence of the outbuilding and vegetation along the road frontage, it would not be unduly prominent or conspicuous when viewed from The Common. A public right of way is located along the western boundary of the site, from which glimpsed views of the extension’s side wall would be possible. The existing trees and other vegetation on the common boundary between the appeal site and the public right of way would provide some screening of the extension when viewed from the footpath. Although this will inevitably be sparser during the winter months, there would be a reasonable separation distance between the public right of way and the extension so that it would not appear unduly prominent or intrusive when walking along the footpath.
The extension would also be viewed in the context of the existing residential curtilage and outbuildings on the appeal site rather than against the backdrop of the open countryside. Therefore, the proposal would not result in a loss of openness within the countryside and would not have a materially harmful impact on the rural character of the area.
Therefore, the proposed extension would be an appropriate addition to the host dwelling which would not harm its character and appearance nor that of the surrounding area and would not conflict with Policies H13 and HQ1 of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan (2018). These policies require extensions to be appropriate in terms of their scale and character with the existing dwelling and to preserve or enhance the character of the local rural area and respond to its context in the wider landscape, whilst not materially changing the impact on its surroundings.
The appellant has referred me to a number of examples of other extensions in the vicinity of the appeal site in support of the proposal. However, I have assessed the appeal in accordance with the development plan and based on the circumstances of the appeal site and the details of the scheme before me.
Section 07
Conditions
In addition to the standard time period for commencement, I have attached a condition requiring the development to accord with the approved plans, as this provides certainty and precision. A condition requiring the use of materials to match the dwelling is also necessary to ensure an appropriate appearance for the development. A condition requiring the retention of the existing vegetation on the southern boundary next to the public right of way as proposed by the appellant is necessary in the interests of safeguarding the rural character and appearance of the area.
Section 08
Conclusion and Recommendation
For the reasons given above and having had regard to all other matters raised, I recommend that the appeal should be allowed.
Section 09
Inspector’s Decision
I have considered all the submitted evidence and the Appeal Planning Officer’s report and on that basis the appeal is 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 1206No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 19 November 2021Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 12 October 2021 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3276111
- Application reference
- 21/00812/HFUL
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- South Cambridgeshire District Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000012
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
- 66 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
- 29 May 2021
- Valid date
- 29 May 2021
- Start date
- 18 August 2021
- Planning authority decision date
- 10 May 2021
- Appeal decision date
- 19 November 2021
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
- 6302
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:25
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21