Appeal 3311685
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
6 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
2 storey extension to the side and loft conversion with dormers to the front and rear.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for 2 storey extension to the side and loft conversion with dormers to the front and rear at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref: APP/22/00900/F dated 30 June 2022, subject to the following
Section 03
conditions:
The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision.
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 2007/01C; 2007/02C; 2007/03C; 2007/04C; 2007/05C.
The materials to be used on the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall be as specified on the planning application form.
The development hereby permitted shall be undertaken in strict accordance with the requirements and proposals set out in the Arboricultural Impact Assessment and [name]: GH2 103 dated 18/02/21 undertaken by Gwydion’s Tree Consultancy and the related plans: GH2103a (Tree Constraints Plan) and GH2103b (Tree Protection Plan).
Section 04
Preliminary Matters and Main Issue
I am advised that the Council gave approval for the loft conversion and dormers to the front and rear under its reference APP/22/00878/[name] the time of my site visit, these elements appeared to be substantially complete. I shall however refer to these elements in the decision as they form part of the proposal before me.
Accordingly, the main issue in this appeal is the effect of the proposal, and in particular the two storey side extension, on the character and appearance of the [address] Conservation Area.
Section 05
Reasons
The appeal property is a detached property on the north side of [address], within a predominantly residential area. The land slopes steeply from the house to the rear of the site.
The appeal site and immediate surrounding area, within the designated heritage asset of the [address] Conservation Area, is characterised by good sized detached dwellings on generous, verdant plots. I agree with the Council that the significance of the Conservation Area is its spacious and verdant character and appearance with a range of attractive detached dwellings. Nonetheless and within the Conservation Area, there is a wide variety of both house and plot sizes, as well as spacing between properties.
The appeal property is sited close to its eastern boundary (with No 10) with a very generous spacing to the western boundary (with No 14). The two storey extension would add another bay to the overall width of the property, but would be set back from the main front elevation and set down from the roof ridge line to provide a subordinate appearance to the main house.
Although the proposal would bring built development closer to the western boundary, I am satisfied that it would still retain a generous open margin on the western side of the property. The form of the proposed extension and the remaining open space to the boundary would allow views through to the trees to the rear, maintaining the verdant appearance of the local area. I consider that the house as proposed to be extended would still sit comfortably within its plot, in terms of the proportion of built development to open space. It would not appear as overdevelopment of the plot but would maintain the spacious and verdant character and appearance of the local area.
Given the bend in the road and the siting of No 14 in its plot and at a slight angle to the appeal property, the property as proposed to be extended would maintain a generous gap between the two properties. This would follow the predominant pattern of development in the local area. It would respect and not detract from the significance of the designated heritage asset in terms of the relationships between buildings and sense of spaciousness.
I am advised that the site is covered by a Tree Preservation Order but the submitted information demonstrates that the proposals would not directly affect these trees. The Council has raised no concern in this regard, but a condition should be imposed to ensure that the development is undertaken in accordance with the submitted arboricultural related documentation.
I am therefore satisfied that the proposal would preserve the character and appearance of the [address] Conservation Area. There would be no conflict with Policies PP27 and PP30 of the Poole Local Plan (November 2018) and the National Planning Policy Framework and in particular Section 16, all of which amongst other things seeks a high quality of design which respects the local context and the significance of heritage assets.
The Appellant has drawn my attention to other extensions permitted in the local area, including the recent approval for a side extension at No 10 under the Council’s reference: APP/21/01877/[name], each proposal must be considered on the basis of its individual planning merits and that has been the basis of my consideration and decision in this case.
Section 06
Conditions and Conclusion
I agree with the Council that the proposed materials should be as set out on the application form in order to respect the character and appearance of the existing property and of the Conservation Area. I shall list the approved plans for the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of good planning.
I shall also add a condition to ensure that the works are undertaken in accordance with the submitted tree protection information, to protect the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, including protected trees.
For the reasons given above, and having regard to all other matters raised, I conclude that the appeal should be allowed.
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 257No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 24 January 2023Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 3 January 2023 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3311685
- Application reference
- APP/22/00900/F
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole
- Planning authority code
- E06000058
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
- 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
- Yes
- 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
- 22 November 2022
- Valid date
- 22 November 2022
- Start date
- 13 December 2022
- Planning authority decision date
- 6 September 2022
- Appeal decision date
- 24 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
- 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
- 26988
- 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