Appeal 3304388
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
raising roof to incorporate new first floor and single storey wrap around side and rear extension.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Procedural Matter
The appellant states that, over the course of the planning application, he experienced long and significant delays to the determining of the scheme; that the Council’s advice was inconsistent; and that he felt aggrieved at the Council’s consideration of an objection to the proposal. These are matters between the appellant and the Council.
Section 04
[name]
The main issues in this case are the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area; and its effect on the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers with regards to privacy.
Section 05
Character and appearance
The appeal property is a detached bungalow with a gable roof. The bungalow is of modest appearance and draws little attention to itself in its surroundings. It has a detached garage behind a parking area to the front of the house and an attached side/rear conservatory.
The appeal property is set within a relatively small garden plot, with narrow gardens to either side of the dwelling and a larger garden area to the rear. The dwelling forms part of a small cul-de-sac accessed from [address], a short distance to the east.
The surrounding area is residential. It is largely characterised by the presence of detached two storey modern dwellings, to the north, east and west of the appeal property, set within garden plots and by that of semi-detached period properties, to the south of the appeal property, with gardens to the side and rear.
During my site visit, I observed there to be a significant sense of greenery and spaciousness, afforded by the considerable presence of comfortable garden plots, hedgerows, occasional trees and planting. Resultantly, dwellings tend to appear “nestled” within green and spacious surroundings.
The proposed development would transform the existing small bungalow into a large and prominent one and two storey property. In so doing, I find that the proposal would introduce a tall and visually bulky new main roof, along with a tall single storey element with a high flat roof. This single storey extension would exceed the eaves height of the existing bungalow and would, due to its scale and flat-roofed design, appear as a bulky and awkward addition.
The harm arising from the above would be exacerbated as a result of the proposed development being of such an overall scale as to fail to appear subservient to the host property. Rather, it would overwhelm the appearance of the existing dwelling. Further, the mass and bulk of the proposal would appear disproportionately large within and would unduly dominate, the appeal property’s modest garden plot, leading it to appear, to some considerable extent, “squeezed-in.” 10.As a consequence of this, the proposal would draw the eye as an incongruous feature within an area characterised by dwellings set within comfortable garden plots. It would appear awkward and would detract from the surrounding area’s identified attributes. 11.Taking the above into account, I find that the proposed development would harm the character and appearance of the area, contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework; to Local Plan1 Policies CP1, CP9, DM35 and DM36; and to the Council’s Householder Planning and Design Guidance Supplementary Planning Document (2020), which together amongst other things, seek to protect local character. Living conditions 12.The proposal would include a number of windows at first floor level facing out towards surrounding dwellings. However, whilst these windows would inevitably result in some increase in overlooking and perceived overlooking, this would generally be from oblique rather than direct angles and would be from some considerable distance from the windows of neighbouring properties. It would also be within an area where some degree of overlooking already exists. 13.Given the above, I find that the proposal would not result in significant harm to the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers, with regards to privacy and in this respect would not be contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework; or to Local Plan2 Policies CP9 and DM35, which together amongst other things, 1 Reference: Wycombe District Local Plan (2019). 2 Reference: Wycombe District Local Plan (2019). 2 seek to protect residential amenity. However, the absence of significant harm in this regard does not mitigate the identified harm to local character and hence the decision below.
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 601No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 15 November 2022Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 19 October 2022 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3304388
- Application reference
- 21/06638/FUL
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Buckinghamshire Council - Wycombe Area *
- Planning authority code
- E07000007
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
- 140 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
- Dismissed
- Decision category
- Dismissed
- Received date
- 2 August 2022
- Valid date
- 2 August 2022
- Start date
- 25 August 2022
- Planning authority decision date
- 8 June 2022
- Appeal decision date
- 15 November 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
- 23565
- 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