Appeal 3283518
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
7 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 double storey side extension including associated demolitions.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted for a double storey side extension including associated demolitions at [site address] , [name], Bristol [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 21/02763/H, dated 17 May 2021, subject to the following conditions:
The development hereby permitted shall not begin 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: 1400-P-050, 1400-P-051, 1400-P-100, 1400-P-101, 1400-P-102.
The external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall be constructed in the materials shown on the plan 1400-P-102 and detailed on the submitted application form.
Section 03
Preliminary Matters
The planning application form refers to the appellant’s name as simply 'Rookes'. However, the Appeal Form and submissions indicate that the appellant is in fact '[name].’ Accordingly, I have reflected this in my banner heading above.
Section 04
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and area.
Section 05
Reasons
[address] is a residential area with predominately semi-detached dwellings fronting the Road, with either a hipped or mansard style roof and are, for the most part, set back from the highway with a uniform building line. [site address] is also set back from the road, but the design and appearance of the dwelling is unlike the neighbouring properties. In particular, the dwelling is detached with a wide gable frontage and a simple pitched roof. No [address] proximity as well as wider views being appreciable at the junction with [address].
A two-storey extension is proposed to the side, with a link between the existing dwelling and the extension. The link would be set back from the main dwelling, with a deeper recess at first floor forming an asymmetrical pitched roof at the front. The remainder of the extension would be built in line with the front elevation and finished in a mixture of render, brick and timber cladding.
Although the extension would be large, it would be narrower than the existing front gable and set down from the main roof, resulting in a subordinate addition to the existing dwelling. Furthermore, the recessed link together with the roof design and mixture of materials would adequately break up the scale and massing of the extended front elevation. Accordingly, despite the proposal not being entirely set back, it would not appear as an overly dominant addition that would unacceptably alter the scale, character and appearance of the dwelling. Furthermore, having regard to the unique appearance of the dwelling in the street as well as the appropriate scale and design of the extension, the impact upon the wider character and appearance of the area is minimal.
I, therefore, conclude that the design and scale of the proposal would be appropriate and the impact upon the character and appearance of the area would not be unacceptable. As such, the scheme complies with Policy BCS21 of the Bristol City Council Core Strategy 2011 as well as Policies DM26, DM27, and DM30 of the Bristol City Council Site Allocations and Development Management Policies 2014, the Bristol City Council Householder Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document 2005 and the National Planning Policy Framework. These policies and guidance, in general, require new development to respect the overall design and character of the host building and contribute positively to an area’s local character.
Section 06
Conditions
I have considered the conditions in accordance with the Planning Practice Guidance.
In addition to the statutory time limit, it is necessary in the interests of precision and clarity, to define the approved plans for the scheme. Furthermore, in order to protect the character and appearance of the host dwelling and the area, a condition ensuring the materials match the proposed finishes would be necessary.
Section 07
Conclusion
For the reasons given above and taking into account the development plan as a whole and all other relevant material considerations, 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 2298No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 10 December 2021Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 30 November 2021 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3283518
- Application reference
- 21/02763/H
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Bristol City Council
- Planning authority code
- E06000023
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
- 134 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
- 23 September 2021
- Valid date
- 23 September 2021
- Start date
- 27 October 2021
- Planning authority decision date
- 23 July 2021
- Appeal decision date
- 10 December 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
- No
- 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
- 7443
- 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