Appeal 3313577
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
described as single storey side / front extension, following demolition of existing conservatory side extension.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area and property itself.
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal site lies is a two storey property within a predominantly residential area, characterised by varying designs of properties without a regimented building line.
The proposed development would comprise a single storey extension, whilst replacing an existing conservatory the extension would project forward from the built form towards the highway. The proposed development would also include the enclosure of a small landscaped area.
Due to the irregular layout of the estate the property faces down the road and whilst I observed this would be the front elevation of the property visually it appears to be a side elevation with the proposed extension to the rear rather than the site. Notwithstanding this due to the prominence of the elevation along with bringing the boundary enclosure hard up to the footpath the proposed development would be dominant and incongruous in the streetscene
I find that the proposed development would harm the character and appearance of the area and the property itself. There is conflict with Policies AD1(a) and EN9 of the Preston Local Plan 2012-26, Site Allocations and Development Management Policies (2015); and Policies D13 and H8 of the Preston Local Plan (2004) which seek to ensure that amongst other things developments respect the existing property and surrounding area.
There is also conflict with the Council’s Residential Extensions and Alterations Supplementary Planning Document (2013) which seeks amongst other things that developments are sympathetic to the property whilst respecting the streetscene.
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 126No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 28 March 2023Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 2 March 2023 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3313577
- Application reference
- 06/2022/1280
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Preston City Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000123
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
- 15 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
- 21 December 2022
- Valid date
- 5 January 2023
- Start date
- 1 February 2023
- Planning authority decision date
- 15 December 2022
- Appeal decision date
- 28 March 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
- 30404
- 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