Skip to main content
Official casework recordAllowedCurrent release

Appeal 3309381

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

8 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

erection of replacement double garage with bedroom/home office above.

  1. Section 02

    Decision

    The appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted for erection of replacement double garage with bedroom/home office above at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application Ref: 22/02415/FUL, dated 23 May 2022, and subject to the conditions in the schedule at the end of this document.

  2. Section 03

    Main Issue

    The main issue in this appeal is the effect of the proposal on the living conditions of neighbours in respect of outlook.

  3. Section 04

    Reasons

    No. [site address] [site address] is a semi-detached dwelling located in a residential area. It is within the [site address] Conservation Area and the Shropshire Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). The Council’s conservation officer considered that the proposal would not be unduly harmful to the conservation area. I see no reason to disagree in view of the location of the proposal in an area with houses of varying character, form and design and because of its limited visual impact on the street scene as a replacement building.

    However, notwithstanding the details provided on the application form, the nature and quality of the proposed external materials, including doors and window frames, must reflect the location of the proposed building within the conservation area. That could be achieved through the imposition of an appropriate condition to allow the Council to control the proposed external materials. I therefore consider that, subject to such a condition, the proposal would preserve the character and appearance of the conservation area. It would also cause no harm to the landscape and scenic beauty of the AONB and would comply with Shropshire Local Development Framework Core Strategy ([name]) policies CS6 and CS17 and also Shropshire Site Allocations and Management of Development Plan policies MD2 and MD13.

    The proposed replacement double garage with bedroom/office above would measure around [site address] .4 m in length x [site address] .1 m in width and 5.5 m in height. It would be situated within the rear garden of the dwelling. The side wall of the existing garage may be seen from the garden and facing windows in the neighbouring detached property of Inglesant, including windows to the kitchen and dining room.

    The neighbours at Inglesant are concerned that there could be loss of daylight to their kitchen and dining room windows, which are described as being already ‘dark’. The building would be sited to the north of Inglesant and therefore there would be no significant increased loss of sunlight or daylight to those windows. No windows are proposed in the roof or side elevation which would face Inglesant, with no consequential loss of privacy for the neighbours. The windows at the front elevation of the proposed building would be obscure glazed to prevent any overlooking of windows in Inglesant.

    The side wall of the existing garage projects above the boundary fence with Inglesant. Drawing ref:736.02C indicates that there would be a minor increase in height at this point next to the boundary, mainly resulting from the roof of the building. The proposed roof would be asymmetrical, with a longer roof slope next to Inglesant. The proposed building would be sited around 1 m from the boundary with the garden of Inglesant, whereas the existing garage abuts that boundary. Despite the proposed increase in height to the ridge line, these design measures would reduce the visual impact of the proposed building when seen from Inglesant.

    The neighbouring property of Somerford projects further than the rear of the building of Inglesant. However, I consider that any tunnelling effect from the proposed garage would not be increased in a significant way, when compared with the current effect from the existing garage. Inglesant also has a relatively long rear garden. Overall, I find that the proposed building would not have a significant increased appearance of dominance or overbearing nature when compared to the visual impact of the existing garage and there would be no significant increased harm to the living conditions of neighbours at Inglesant in terms of outlook. The proposal would therefore comply with [name] policy CS6 which, amongst other things, seeks to ensure residential amenity is safeguarded.

  4. Section 05

    Other Matters

    The appellant has referred to other similar developments in the area. However, the particular site circumstances for these would have been different. Although concerns were raised regarding the access and traffic generation, the Highway Authority raised no objection to the proposal.

  5. Section 06

    Conditions

    In addition to a condition for the standard timescale for the commencement of development, a condition is included to confirm the plans hereby approved. A condition is included to ensure that the Council has control over the proposed external materials and that they complement the character and appearance of the conservation area. A condition is imposed to require obscure glazing for the two windows in the proposed front elevation in the interest of protecting the privacy of neighbours. A condition is also included to ensure that the proposed building can only be used and occupied as ancillary to the main dwelling in order to protect the residential amenity of neighbours

  6. Section 07

    Conclusion

    I have taken all other matters raised into account. However, for the reasons given above, I conclude that the appeal should be allowed.

  7. Section 08

    Schedule of Conditions

    The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision.

    The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 864299-736A location plan, 864299-736.02C proposed plans and elevations and 864299-736.[address] scenes.

    No development shall commence until details of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the extension hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

    The windows in the south-east elevation of the building hereby permitted shall be fitted with obscure glazing prior to occupation and the obscure glazing shall thereafter be retained.

    The replacement double garage with bedroom/home office above hereby permitted shall not be occupied at any time other than for purposes ancillary to the residential use of the dwelling known as [site address] .

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 108No official casework-database value to compare
    Extracted decision date · page 1
    21 February 2023Matches the official casework database
    Extracted site visit dates
    17 January 2023 (page 1)

Reference and authority

Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.

Case reference
3309381
Application reference
22/02415/FUL
Lead case reference
Not recorded
Planning authority
Shropshire County Council
Planning authority code
E06000051

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
64 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
20 October 2022
Valid date
20 October 2022
Start date
16 December 2022
Planning authority decision date
11 August 2022
Appeal decision date
21 February 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
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
28596
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