Appeal 3307573
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
single storey rear & front extensions. Two storey side extension.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the proposed development upon the character and appearance of the surrounding area.
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal property is a 2 storey house with attached flat roofed garage. The house has a mansard roof appearance at the front with the lower roof slope forming the first floor. A single storey flat roof porch extends out to the front and is joined at the side by the garage which is set back slightly behind it. The house is one of a group of three similarly designed houses which are linked to each other by their side garages. There is also a group of four houses sharing the same design on the opposite side of the road.
Elsewhere along the road, groups of houses share a variety of common designs. However, the key characteristics shared by most houses were flat roofed front extensions and side garages.
The proposed development would include converting the garage and extending it to the front, level with the porch. The flat roofs would be replaced with a dual pitched roof over the porch and extended frontage. The pitched roof and gable end would be conspicuous and at odds with flat roofed front projections which characterise the street scene. As such it would harm the character and appearance of the area and conflict with Policies DM35 and DM36 of the Wycombe District Local Plan (2019) and the Householder Planning and Design Guidance Supplementary Planning Document (2020) which require high quality development that respects the character and appearance of the surrounding area.
Section 05
Conclusion
For the reasons given above I conclude that the 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 128No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 5 January 2023Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 6 December 2022 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3307573
- Application reference
- 22/06923/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
- 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
- Dismissed
- Decision category
- Dismissed
- Received date
- 23 September 2022
- Valid date
- 23 September 2022
- Start date
- 8 November 2022
- Planning authority decision date
- 20 September 2022
- Appeal decision date
- 5 January 2023
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
- 26054
- 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