Appeal 3276965
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
5 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 extension to side elevation to form enlarged kitchen and lounge area.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for single-storey extension to side elevation to form enlarged kitchen and lounge area at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 21/00374/FUL, dated 1 March 2021, subject to the following
Section 03
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; Block Plan; Existing and [name] and Elevations.
The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing building unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
No windows or other openings shall be constructed in the rear elevation (as so labelled on the Existing and [name] and Elevations drawing) of the extension hereby permitted.
Section 04
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect on the character and appearance of the area.
Section 05
Reasons
[address] is lined with a variety of dwellings of differing appearance in a suburban residential environment. On the opposite side of the road to the appeal site, dwellings are generally of small scale, which combined with the topography, affords views across their roofs, making them recessive in the street scene and creating a spacious and open character.
The site side of the road is more enclosed, dwellings being generally closer to the highway, with some of larger scale. While built attached to No.[address], the appeal site is a corner plot with a different appearance, facing [address]. It has a relatively long front garden. The proposal would bring the side elevation practically up to the site boundary with [address], and closer than a similarly sited dwelling at the nearby [address] and [address] junction.
Nevertheless, the presence of the front garden area would maintain a spaciousness about the plot. The dwelling would be seen in three-dimensions with a clear primary relationship to [address]. As such, the proposal would not have a discordant or dominating effect, such as may result from extensions to a front elevation. A window would avoid the presence of a plain, oppressive wall in the street scene.
Importantly, with regard to the features that contribute to the spaciousness of [address], the overall character and appearance of the area would not be harmed. There would, therefore, be no conflict with the aims of LP Policy DEV20 of the Plymouth and South West Devon Joint Local Plan that seek to ensure development contributes positively to the townscape, protecting and improving the quality of the built environment.
The extension would be close to the boundary with No.36. There are established off-site trees in the front garden of the neighbouring dwelling that may be disturbed during construction works, including through alterations to the soil conditions. However, there is no substantive evidence that such harm would arise. In any case, these trees to not make a fundamental contribution to the overall character and appearance of the area, so potential effects on them are of little weight in my decision.
Clear-glass ground floor front windows at No.36 are some distance from the boundary and so the proposal would not harm the outlook of this neighbour. As an otherwise open frontage to the street would be retained, I find no harm to living conditions, including in combination with other extensions at the appeal site.
Nevertheless, a condition should be used to prevent windows being inserted into the wall facing No.36, to protect privacy. A plans condition is required in the interests of certainty, and a condition requiring materials to match the existing dwelling is required in the interests of the character and appearance of the area.
With regard to the above, I conclude that the appeal should be 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 696No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 3 November 2021Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 19 October 2021 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3276965
- Application reference
- 21/00374/FUL
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Plymouth City Council
- Planning authority code
- E06000026
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
- 24 m²
- Number of residences
- 1
- 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
- 13 June 2021
- Valid date
- 13 June 2021
- Start date
- 22 September 2021
- Planning authority decision date
- 8 April 2021
- Appeal decision date
- 3 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
- 5525
- 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