Appeal 3292530
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
the erection of a two storey part single storey side and rear extension and removal of detached garage.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Procedural Matter
I was unable to access the rear of the appeal property during the site visit. However, I was able to sufficiently view the site of the proposed development from the road and the neighbouring property to enable me to determine this appeal.
Section 04
Main Issue
It is considered that the main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the living conditions of the occupiers of [address].
Section 05
Reasons
The appeal property is a detached 2-storey dwelling which is proposed to be altered by the erection of a rear extension that would, in part, be sited upon the footprint of a single storey garage. The proposed development, including a 2-storey element, would be sited adjacent to the shared boundary with [address]. This neighbouring property possesses a 2-storey rear addition with ground floor openings serving a kitchen/dining area facing towards the shared boundary. Between the addition and the boundary is a surfaced patio area forming part of a modest sized garden. There is no objection was made by the current occupiers of No. 137 to the proposed development but others may well occupy this dwelling in the future.
Although there is a window within the rear elevation of the addition, the siting and, in part, the 2-storey height of the proposed development would adversely affect the outlook from the side windows and patio area. The appeal scheme would be a visually dominant and overbearing form of development. The 2- storey element of the appeal scheme would not be sufficiently off-set from the shared boundary to mitigate the adverse harm identified.
Although the relationship between the appeal property and No. 137 would not materially reduce levels of sunlight and daylight reaching the openings within the addition of No. 137 and its patio, this matter is demonstrably and significantly outweighed by the adverse harm associated with the impact on the outlook of the occupiers of this neighbouring property.
For the reasons given, it is concluded that there would be unacceptable harm caused to the living conditions of the occupiers of [address] and, as such, there would be a conflict with Policy 58 of the Cambridge Local Plan (LP) which, amongst other matters, requires residential extensions to not unacceptably overlook, overshadow or visually dominate neighbouring properties. LP Policy 56 does not include specific criteria related to the main issue. Accordingly, it is concluded that this 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 1351No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 25 June 2022Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 18 May 2022 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3292530
- Application reference
- 21/02800/HFUL
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Cambridge City Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000008
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
- 50 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
- Dismissed
- Decision category
- Dismissed
- Received date
- 10 February 2022
- Valid date
- 10 February 2022
- Start date
- 25 February 2022
- Planning authority decision date
- 25 January 2022
- Appeal decision date
- 25 June 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
- 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
- 16891
- 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