Skip to main content
Official casework recordDismissedCurrent release

Appeal 3309710

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

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

a detached garage with store room above.

  1. Section 02

    Decision

    The appeal is dismissed.

  2. Section 03

    Main Issue

    The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the site and its surroundings.

  3. Section 04

    Reasons

    The proposal is for a detached garage building to be associated with No 1, a semi-detached property with garden behind on the east side of [address]. The garage would be sited within a long rectangular wooded area which extends to one side as far as the B4507, accessed via an existing driveway from that road which runs through the woodland up towards the side of No 1 ending in a small parking area.

    The three-bay garage would be about 9.3 m wide by 6.0 m deep, with a duo-pitched roof about 5.6 m to the ridge. An external staircase would lead into a storage area within the roofspace with a centrally placed dormer window on one side. The garage would be sited in a clearing on one side of the driveway within the woodland some way short of the parking area.

    There is no objection to a detached garage in principle, indeed No 2, the other semi-detached property, has a recently constructed two-bay garage to one side. The proposed materials, timber weatherboarding and tiled roof, would be sympathetic. However, in this case the substantial three-bay garage with storage above would be located well away (over 30 m) from the main house, where it would appear visually detached from its host property and oddly located in the middle of the wooded area rather than being closely associated with the primary building. The slightly lower ground level and ridge height do not mitigate this point. No explanation is provided why this site has been chosen particularly as the delegated report notes that there was previously an outbuilding at the end of the driveway adjacent to the domestic garden of No 1 where it would have appeared part of the cluster of residential buildings.

    Core Policy 37 of the Vale of White Horse Local Plan Part 1 2016 requires new development to respond positively to the site and its surroundings and to reinforce local identity. The Council’s Joint Design Guide 2022 provides specific guidance as to the design of garages and outbuildings, essentially that they should be well related but subservient to the host dwelling.

  4. Section 05

    Conclusion

    In this case the combination of the scale of the proposed garage, its location in the middle of the wooded area and the degree of separation from the main dwelling would significantly harm the character and appearance of the site and its surroundings contrary to Core Policy 37 and the principles of the [name]. The importance of a sensitive scheme in this location is increased due to its location within the North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty where great weight should be given to conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty. The benefits of providing a triple garage with storage for the appellant do not outweigh these considerations.

    Having regard to the above 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 1064No official casework-database value to compare
    Extracted decision date · page 1
    7 August 2023Matches the official casework database
    Extracted site visit dates
    28 July 2023 (page 1)

Reference and authority

Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.

Case reference
3309710
Application reference
P22/V0855/FUL
Lead case reference
Not recorded
Planning authority
Vale of White Horse District Council
Planning authority code
E07000180

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
90 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
Yes
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
25 October 2022
Valid date
25 October 2022
Start date
2 March 2023
Planning authority decision date
5 September 2022
Appeal decision date
7 August 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
36697
First seen
20 August 2026 at 14:24
Last seen
20 August 2026 at 16:27
Removed from release
Not recorded
Record created
20 August 2026 at 14:24
Record updated
24 August 2026 at 16:21