Appeal 3289867
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
the construction of a deck and shed base with steps access to the river bank.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue is whether it has been demonstrated that the proposed development will not exacerbate flooding.
Section 04
Background
The appeal site comprises a two storey detached house which fronts [address] close to the road bridge over the [name] which runs alongside the property. The appellant’s ‘self-drawn’ plans indicate that the appeal site extends to the centre of the river and includes the riverbank. This is mainly a grassed bank with willow trees but at the top of the bank are the areas of proposed decking and shed base. The application is therefore partly retrospective, but the proposed steps have not been constructed; only some temporary concrete blocks are in place to allow access to the lower level.
Section 05
Effect on flooding
The appeal site lies within [name] 3 which has the highest risk of flooding. The Council, on the advice of the Environment Agency, says that given the level of risk a Flood Risk Assessment, as recognised in paragraphs 167/168 of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework), should be submitted as part of the scheme as operational development is proposed in the flood zone. The appellant had submitted a [name] dated 2016 and other evidence but the authorities did not consider that this provided sufficient detailed evidence.
At the site visit I noted the relative heights of the road bridge and the culvert beneath it and I saw that the level of the decking is well above the level of the road itself over the bridge. Nevertheless, the decking is supported on some 10 timber legs and these, together with the permanent steps, are sited on the sloping riverbank and could be expected to be within floodwater and affect the flow of the river depending on the nature of the flood and the effect of the bridge abutments. There is also a likelihood of the void below the overhanging structure being used for the storage of garden items and paraphernalia which may impede flood flow. Although the appellant has provided some evidence on local land levels, this information does not model flood levels of the river in detail taking account of climate change.
On the evidence provided, and in the absence of an up-to-date site specific Flood Risk Assessment, I am unable to assess whether the development proposed would be likely to exacerbate flooding around the site and elsewhere. As the proposal stands, I conclude that it conflicts with the provisions of Core Strategy Policy CS.4, guidance on flood risk in Planning Practice Guidance and paragraph 167 of the Framework. This conflict is not outweighed by any other consideration and this indicates that the appeal should not be allowed.
Section 06
Conclusion
For the reasons given above I conclude that the appeal should be dismissed.
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 447No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 22 April 2022Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 19 April 2022 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3289867
- Application reference
- 21/01319/FUL
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Stratford-on-Avon District Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000221
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
- Not recorded
- 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
- Yes
- 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
- Dismissed
- Decision category
- Dismissed
- Received date
- 27 December 2021
- Valid date
- 27 December 2021
- Start date
- 13 January 2022
- Planning authority decision date
- 13 October 2021
- Appeal decision date
- 22 April 2022
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
- 14204
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:26
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21