Appeal 3291229
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
roof conversion and alterations. Including raising of roof and erection of second storey over utility room.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for roof conversion and alterations. Including raising of roof and erection of second storey over utility room at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name].21/1911/HHOLD, dated 4 August 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, Site Plan, [name]: AC 001 -03 revision 03A, Comparison of proposed to existing SW and SE elevations [name]: AC 002-04 revision 04A, Comparison of proposed to existing NE and NW elevations [name]: AC 003-03 revision 03B, Site levels and surrounding detail [name]: AC 004-02 revision 02B, Comparison of proposed floorplan and bedroom to existing [name]: AC 005-03 revision 03A.
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.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and the wider area.
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal property, [site address] , is a detached dwelling situated on a steep slope. The dwelling is constructed of natural stone with a traditional character and appearance and has previously been extended. The dwelling is situated amongst a small cluster of other dwellings of a similar size. The rear elevation of the dwelling looks across the valley to the east.
The site is set within the Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). As the property is within the AONB, I have a duty to ensure that the proposal would not undermine the statutory purpose of the AONB to conserve and enhance the natural beauty of the area. In this instance both parties are in agreement that, due to the location of the appeal site within the built-up area of the AONB, the proposal would not cause harm in this respect. For this reason and the reasons set out below I concur.
The proposal is to provide a roof conversion and alterations which involve the raising of the roof of the existing extended element of the dwelling, together with the erection of a second storey over the existing utility room. The proposal also includes a new timber veranda to the front elevation.
The proposal would indeed represent a significant and notable alteration to the roof form of the building. The roof line, at present, is staggered and steps down in sections. Whilst the proposal would raise the height of the roof this would only be to the extent that it would match the highest point of the existing roof resulting in a consistent roof line across the width of the building.
[name] note that the inclusion of a mansard roof would not represent an entirely traditional design feature, in my view, the design, including the use of matching materials, would ensure that this element of the proposal would not appear unduly prominent or visually jarring but would rather sit comfortably within its context.
The proposal includes the addition of a gable end roof feature along the south-east elevation and a balcony and gable roof feature along the north-west elevation. These features would each be constructed using complementary or matching materials and have been designed in such a way so as to reflect the existing dwelling and its features. The proposed alterations would also be consistent with the scale and proportions of the host dwelling. As such, in my view, the proposed roofscape would appear as a visually cohesive element of the wider dwelling and would not appear overly complicated or piecemeal.
The proposed gable end side extension would be relatively modest and would incorporate an overhang. The overhang would be of a minimal size, when viewed in the context of the building as a whole, and would be finished in timber clapboard cladding. This would ensure that this part of the proposal would appear as a visually different element of the design which would not seek to appear as though it were part of the original fabric of the building. Nevertheless, the overhang would also draw on other materials used within the wider area and for this reason, when also considered in light of the relatively small scale of this part of the proposal, would make sure that it would not appear as a visually jarring or incongruous feature.
Furthermore, the existing dwelling and the plot within which it sits is large enough to accommodate the building as amended without the proposed alterations appearing as a visually dominant or incongruous addition.
I note that the dwelling is visible in long views; for example from [address]. However, in many of the views from the public domain I was able to observe during my site visit, including those from [address], [site address] was largely screened from view by mature trees and greenery. Furthermore, the dwelling is seen in the context of others within the surrounding area; a number of which have consistent, single height, roof forms or modern additions themselves.
Overall, for the reasons given above, I consider that the proposed alterations would be sympathetic to the traditional character and appearance of the existing building and others within the area. I therefore consider that the proposal would not cause harm to the character and appearance of the host dwelling or the wider area.
Consequently, the proposal would accord with Policies HC8 and CP14 of the Stroud District Local Plan, November 2015 (LP). These policies, amongst other things, support development that is of an appropriate design and appearance and state that permission will be granted for the extension of residential properties provided the height, scale, form and design of the extension is in keeping with the scale and character of the original dwelling and the site’s wider setting and location.
Section 05
Conditions
In the interests of precision and clarity I have undertaken some minor editing and rationalisation of the conditions proposed by the Council. Alongside the standard time limit condition, I have imposed a condition specifying the relevant plans as this provides certainty. In the interests of protecting the character and appearance of the area I have imposed a condition with regard to the materials to be used.
Section 06
Conclusion
For the reasons given above I allow the appeal.
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 116No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 7 December 2022Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 10 May 2022 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3291229
- Application reference
- S.21/1911/HHOLD
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Stroud District Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000082
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
- Unknown
- 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
- 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
- 21 January 2022
- Valid date
- 27 January 2022
- Start date
- 5 April 2022
- Planning authority decision date
- 10 December 2021
- Appeal decision date
- 7 December 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
- 24687
- 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