Appeal 3314080
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
construction of elevated walkway incorporating balustrade.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for Construction of elevated walkway incorporating balustrade at [site address] , [site address] , Lancashire [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, 322/01378/FUL dated 7 November 2022, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following 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, Location plan entitled [site address] , [site address] , Lancashire, [postcode] , Drg. No’s: A3-02 Rev.B, P01, P02, P03, P04, P05 and P06.
The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall be in accordance with the application form.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue in this appeal is the effect of the proposed development on the living conditions of the occupiers of No’s. [address] and 7A Woodlands.
Section 04
Reasons
The site is a detached property which is undergoing renovation. There is a larger rear extension expanding the full width of the property at the rear being constructed. This extension has floor to ceiling glazing on both the rear and side elevations. The rear garden of the site slopes away from the property significantly, due to the topography the extension and property are elevated.
I observed during my site visit that there is a degree of mutual overlooking between properties in the area, and also noted that in the wider area balconies are not uncommon.
The proposed walkway would extend from the existing pathway adjacent the boundary with 7A Woodlands wrapping around the rear extension and along the side of the property adjacent the boundary with [address].
Due to the elevated position of the property and topography of the site it is obvious that the proposed development would provide views towards adjacent neighbouring properties. Notwithstanding this there is currently unrestricted views from the rear extension which has significant amounts of glazing on the rear and side elevations and from existing windows on the side elevations of the property.
Whilst the walkway would project closer to the neighbouring properties, the rear extension and internal rooms allow overlooking all year around, unlike a walkway which the use of would reasonably be dependent on the weather.
I find that the walkway would not exacerbate the existing situation and there would not be any additional loss of privacy to the occupiers of neighbouring properties.
I conclude that the proposed development would not harm the living conditions of the occupiers of No’s. [address] and 7A Woodlands.
There is no conflict with Policy DM29 of the A Local Plan for Lancaster District 2011-2031, [name]: Review of Development Management DPD (2020) which seeks amongst other things to ensure development protects the living conditions of neighbouring properties.
There is also no conflict with the National Planning Policy Framework (2021) which seeks to ensure developments maintain a high standard of amenity for existing and future users.
Section 05
Conclusion and Conditions
For the above reasons I conclude that this appeal should be allowed.
I have attached the standard time limit condition and a plans condition as this provides certainty. I have also added a condition concerning materials to ensure a satisfactory appearance.
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
- 3314080
- Application reference
- 22/01378/FUL
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Lancaster City Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000121
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
- Allowed
- Decision category
- Allowed
- Received date
- 4 January 2023
- Valid date
- 4 January 2023
- Start date
- 2 February 2023
- Planning authority decision date
- 22 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
- 30408
- 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