Appeal 3306050
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
4 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 side extension to provide a single garage.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the proposed garage on the character and appearance of the street scene of [address].
Section 04
Reasons
I saw on my visit that [address] is an estate development with a house design and external materials of a good standard that combine to provide a pleasingly coherent design. No. 16 sits comfortably within this vernacular with the hipped roof of the single-storey side element sitting comfortably alongside the main part of the dwelling and together forming a harmonious development.
However, the proposed garage roof would create an awkward relationship with the roof of the single-storey part of the house and this would be clearly seen in both the front and flank elevations which are part of the street scene. The discordant effect would be accentuated by the projection of the garage in front of the dwelling’s single storey element.
This would increase the prominence of an essentially utilitarian building which, as the Council points out, is required by supporting paragraph 7.94 of the SDNP Local Plan 2014-33 adopted in 2019 (‘the Local Plan’) to be sensitively sited and not to detract from the character and appearance of the main dwelling.
I acknowledge the fully hipped roof of the garage reflects other garages in [address], but in this position the addition would appear as an unsympathetic ‘bolt-on’ to the host dwelling rather than integrating with the original design. Furthermore, with the longer views along the road towards the lower and main part of the [address] development, the garage would be particularly prominent and draw the eye.
I consider that in these views the garage would be perceived negatively as a development that, because it does not integrate with the host dwelling, would also harm the street scene. As such it would also be harmful to the setting of the adjoining Petworth Conservation Area.
I have carefully considered the grounds of appeal, which fully and fairly set out the case for the appellant. However, it will be clear from the reasons set out above that as a matter of planning judgement I support the Council’s view that the proposal would have an unacceptably harmful effect on both the host dwelling and the street scene of [address].
This would be in harmful conflict with Local Plan Policies, in particular Policy SD31, and with Government policy in Section 12: ‘[name] of the National Planning Policy Framework 2021.
The appeal therefore fails.
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 204No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 19 December 2022Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 25 November 2022 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3306050
- Application reference
- SDNP/22/1045/HOUS
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- South Downs
- Planning authority code
- E26000010
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
- 30 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
- 30 August 2022
- Valid date
- 30 August 2022
- Start date
- 20 October 2022
- Planning authority decision date
- 1 August 2022
- Appeal decision date
- 19 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
- 25478
- 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