Skip to main content
Official casework recordAllowedCurrent release

Appeal 3295232

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 works

One-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 new porch and entrance.

  1. Section 02

    Decision

    The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a new porch and entrance at [site address] , [address], Bussage, Stroud, [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name].21/2797/HHOLD, dated 14 November 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: • Site Location Plan (Scale 1:1250, submitted on 24/11/2021); • [name] (drg no. 830/P/02, date on drawing 13/08/2021); • Proposed Site Plan (drg no. 830/P/04, date on drawing 14/11/2021); and • [name] (drg no. 830/P/11, date on drawing 13/08/2021)

    No works shall take place on the external surfaces of the extension hereby permitted until samples of the materials to be used in the construction works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

  2. Section 03

    Main Issue

    The main issue is the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the host property.

  3. Section 04

    Reasons

    [site address] is a large, detached, traditional stone-built property, set within a sizeable plot. The dwelling has an attractive appearance, albeit its front elevation is rather lacking in coherence. This is due to the mix of existing structures attached to this elevation, alongside the informal nature of its entrance. As such, the dwelling’s rear elevation is more akin to its principal frontage, due to its proportions and fenestration arrangements displaying a rather grand, imposing façade.

    The appeal site is located off a narrow rural lane and is largely screened from the public realm by mature vegetation along the site’s boundaries. Neighbouring properties are primarily detached but vary in age and style, with many traditional properties of a rural Cotswold vernacular being interspersed with more modern additions. The mix of dwellings reflect the incremental, historic growth of the area.

    The proposed porch extension is of a sizeable scale. However, despite its double storey height, it would nevertheless demonstrate an appropriate level of subservience to the existing dwellinghouse and would not overwhelm the host building. The large extent of glazing proposed would also provide a lightness to its construction, while allowing views through to the original building to be retained. This would enable the visual integrity of the host building to be largely maintained.

    The proposal would result in a contemporary addition to an otherwise traditional building, it would therefore, to some extent, unsettle its traditional character. However, the contrast in design would appear deliberate in nature and would not be harmful to the property’s character or appearance. Indeed, the elevation that the proposal would be sited upon has a rather disjointed appearance. Consequently, the proposal would better articulate the entrance to the property and provide greater legibility to the front elevation of the dwelling.

    Overall, whilst the proposed development would be a sizeable contrasting addition, it would remain sympathetic to the appeal property due to its design and positioning. Additionally, it would not be highly visible from public vantage points, given the property is set back within its plot, and due to the presence of an existing detached garage and mature vegetation.

    Consequently, the appeal scheme would not cause harm to the character and appearance of the host property. Accordingly, it complies with Policies HC8 and ES12 of the Stroud District Local Plan 2015. Together the policies, amongst other matters, seek to ensure that the design of new development is of a high quality that respects the appearance of the site and surrounding area.

  4. Section 05

    Other Matters

    The site lies within the Brownshill and Old Bussage Conservation Area (CA). It’s significance is derived from its tranquil rural village character that has an informal and loose knit appearance. This is largely derived from the manner that development in the area sits within the surrounding countryside and establishes a historic link with it, alongside its network of country lanes and a sense of spaciousness. The Council has concluded that the development would not cause harm to the CA and therefore its reason for refusal relates solely to the impacts to the appeal property itself. Nevertheless, I have a statutory duty to consider the impacts on the CA. Given my above findings that the proposal will not harm the character and appearance of the host property, I am also satisfied that the character and appearance of the CA will be preserved.

    The site is also located within the Cotswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). The Council does not allege that the proposed development would cause harm to the AONB. From my own observations, I concur that the AONB’s landscape and scenic beauty would be conserved.

  5. Section 06

    Conditions

    The Council has suggested conditions should the appeal be allowed. I have considered the suggested conditions and amended them as necessary in the interests of precision and clarity, as well as to comply with advice in the Planning Practice Guidance.

    In addition to the standard time limit, a condition is needed to secure compliance with the approved plans, for the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning. A condition requiring approval of sample materials is also necessary in the interest of the appearance of the development.

  6. Section 07

    Conclusion

    For the reasons outline above and having regard to the development plan, as a whole, and all other material considerations, 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 2658No official casework-database value to compare
    Extracted decision date · page 1
    25 May 2022Matches the official casework database
    Extracted site visit dates
    12 May 2022 (page 1)

Reference and authority

Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.

Case reference
3295232
Application reference
S.21/2797/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
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
3 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
21 March 2022
Valid date
21 March 2022
Start date
31 March 2022
Planning authority decision date
14 February 2022
Appeal decision date
25 May 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
15709
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