Appeal 3278395
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
6 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
part first floor extension to existing bungalow.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for part first floor extension to existing bungalow at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 21/00928/FUL, dated 8 March 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: 257-00; 257.02 (amended 17.06.2021)
Section 03
Procedural Matter
On 20 July 2021, the Government published a revised version of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework). The revised Framework does not materially alter the national policy approach in respect of the main issues raised in this appeal and therefore no parties have been prejudiced by its publication.
Section 04
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the area.
Section 05
Reasons
[address] is characterised by detached dwellings set within spacious, verdant plots. The appeal property is a bungalow, but most dwellings in the street are larger chalet-style bungalows with dormer windows, or two-storey dwellings. Many of the dwellings have clearly been extended over time in various different sizes and forms. Variety in dwelling size, shape and form is also found throughout the wider [site address] estate.
Patently the two-storey height of the extension would not be subservient to the existing bungalow. Nonetheless, the extension would be located at one end of the building with its roof running perpendicular to the existing, such that once the extension is constructed, the lower and higher elements would dovetail neatly together in a proportionate and coherent t-shape form. In addition, the height of the extension would be comparative with neighbouring dwellings and it would not extend any further towards the front and side boundaries. The modern design would be bespoke to the property, but owing to the site’s secluded location at the end of the cul-de-sac, the development would not be unduly conspicuous in the street scene.
Overall, even though the proposal would result in a significant change in the form and appearance of the host dwelling, it would be achieved in an appropriate manner, both in respect of the existing dwelling and the established character of the surroundings.
I therefore conclude that the development would not harm the character or appearance of the area. Consequently, the proposal complies with saved Policy H14 of the Castle Morpeth District Local Plan (2003) and Policies PNP2 and PNP 4 of the Ponteland Neighbourhood Plan. These seek good design which respects the appearance of the property and the quality, distinctiveness and character of the area. The proposal also complies with the good design aims in paragraph 130 of the Framework.
Section 06
Conditions and Conclusion
As suggested by the Council in the appeal Questionnaire, I have imposed the standard commencement and approved plans conditions to provide certainty.
Subject to these conditions, and for the reasons given, 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 597No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 1 September 2021Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 24 August 2021 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3278395
- Application reference
- 21/00928/FUL
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Northumberland County Council
- Planning authority code
- E06000057
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
- 77 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
- 5 July 2021
- Valid date
- 6 July 2021
- Start date
- 7 July 2021
- Planning authority decision date
- 22 June 2021
- Appeal decision date
- 1 September 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
- 2562
- 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