Skip to main content
Official casework recordAllowedCurrent release

Appeal 3331365

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

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

a ground floor rear extension, first floor side extension, front porch infill and associated internal alterations.

  1. Section 02

    Decision

    The appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted for a ground floor rear extension, first floor side extension, front porch infill and associated internal alterations at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, 23/P/01009, dated 12 June 2023 subject to the following conditions: -

    The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of the decision.

    The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following plans: 2407_01 – site location plan, 2407_02 - existing and proposed ground floor plans, 2407_03 – existing and proposed first floor plans, 2407_04 – existing and proposed roof plans, 2407_05 - existing and proposed front and rear elevations, 2407_06 – existing and proposed side elevations and 2407_07 – proposed block plan.

    The materials to be used in the external surfaces of the external surfaces of the extension hereby permitted shall match those of the existing dwelling.

  2. Section 03

    Main Issue

    The main issue is the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and the surrounding area.

  3. Section 04

    Reasons

    No.33 is a semi-detached two storey dwelling with a flat roof garage to the side. It is sited at a right-angled bend in the road with the flank elevation set some distance back with an intervening grassed area running along the side of Nos.33 and No.31.

    The properties along [address] are of the same general style and form although many have been extended creating lengthy front facades to some of the semi-detached pairs. The Council does not raise any concerns with the proposed porch and single-storey rear extension, and I have no reason to disagree. Therefore, my considerations are restricted to the side extension.

    The proposed side extension would result in two-storey form up to the side boundary. The extension is not designed to have subservience to the host dwelling, as generally promoted by the Council’s Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) – [name] and Alterations, yet the continuous approach would result in a cohesive appearance with the materials and fenestration matching the existing dwelling.

    As noted by the appellant and seen on my site visit, there are several properties along the road which have similar continuous forms of extensions over the garage and are an integrated part of the character of the area. The existing garage to the appeal dwelling already forms the side boundary and with no neighbour to that side there would be no terracing effect; the impact the SPD guidance seeks to minimise through the setting back and down of side extensions.

    The proposed extension does not directly follow some of the criteria in the SPD, this is however guidance, and each proposal is to be considered on its own merits. Set some distance back from the road, the extension can be accommodated without appearing out of scale or visually intrusive and in my view would fully harmonise with the existing property and the character of the area.

    For the above reasons, I consider that the proposed side extension would respect the scale, form and character of the existing property and would not appear dominant or harmful to its surroundings. Consequently, it would not conflict with Policy D1 of the Guildford Borough Local Plan: Strategy and Sites 2015-2034, and Policies H4 and D4 of the Guildford Borough Council: Development Management Policies (March 2023). Collectively these require developments to respect the existing context, scale, character and appearance of the surroundings and generally be sympathetic to the existing built environment. I also find compliance with the objectives of the SPD as a whole and the National Planning Policy Framework which promotes high-quality design.

  4. Section 05

    Conditions

    Conditions are imposed to ensure compliance with the statutory requirements relating to the commencement of development and the plans in order to provide certainty. I have also imposed a condition requiring the materials of the approved development to match the existing property in the interests of the character and appearance of the area.

  5. Section 06

    Conclusion

    For the reasons set out and having regard to all other matters raised the appeal is 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 362No official casework-database value to compare
    Extracted site visit dates
    6 December 2023 (page 1)

Reference and authority

Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.

Case reference
3331365
Application reference
23/P/01009
Lead case reference
Not recorded
Planning authority
Guildford Borough Council
Planning authority code
E07000209

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
35 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
No
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
16 October 2023
Valid date
16 October 2023
Start date
1 November 2023
Planning authority decision date
7 August 2023
Appeal decision date
19 December 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
No
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
44015
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