Appeal 3328071
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
described as front and rear single storey extensions.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
[name]
I have taken the description of development above from the planning application form. A more accurate description is however provided on the decision notice as ‘Extensions and alterations’ as this encompasses the proposed alterations to the site boundary.
Section 04
Main Issue
The effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area.
Section 05
Reasons
This appeal concerns a two storey dwellinghouse occupying a corner plot within an open-plan residential development comprised of properties of similar type and design.
The proposed front extension would have a gable feature over the front door. Whilst such gables are not common in this residential area, this element of the single storey front extension is of limited size and would not add significant bulk so as to detract from the original design of the dwelling.
The slim design of the proposed front windows would however be noticeably at odds with the character of the host property and the large picture windows prevalent on dwellings in this locality. This alternative design approach would fail to reinforce or complement local character in this instance.
The proposed close boarded fence above a brick wall would wrap around the side of the host dwelling. Due to the site’s corner positioning the full extent of the proposed boundary would be readily apparent from public vantage points, assisted also by the incline in topography in this location. The introduction of solid built form of a significant height and length close to the highway in this prominent location would erode the sense of openness and thus would fail to reflect the open-plan arrangement of built form in the locality. It would not be of a material or design appropriate to the character of the area thus would read as a stark and intrusive addition.
Whilst adjacent boundaries are of significant height they comprise mature hedging and thus are not dominant features which detract from the sense of space. It has not been demonstrated to me that a private and secure rear garden could not be achieved with a boundary treatment more in keeping with the area.
Although there have been no objections to the development, a lack of opposition for a proposal is not a ground for granting planning permission and does not overcome the issues identified.
Accordingly, the proposal would harm the character and appearance of the host dwelling and the wider area, thus it would conflict with Policy DC1 of the Staffordshire Moorlands Local Plan (September 2020). Together with section 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework, this policy and guidance aims for well-designed developments which respect the character of the area.
Section 06
Conclusion
The proposal conflicts with the development plan as a whole and there are no other considerations which indicate that a decision should be made other than in accordance with it. Therefore, the appeal should not succeed.
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 1499No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 10 June 2024Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 29 May 2024 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3328071
- Application reference
- SMD/2022/0303
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Staffordshire Moorlands District Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000198
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
- Not recorded
- Number of residences
- 0
- Site in Green Belt
- No
- Agricultural holding
- Not recorded
- 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
- 18 August 2023
- Valid date
- 18 August 2023
- Start date
- 10 April 2024
- Planning authority decision date
- 20 June 2023
- Appeal decision date
- 10 June 2024
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
- 52180
- 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