Skip to main content
Official casework recordAllowedCurrent release

Appeal 3344779

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

7 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

creation of first floor balcony.

  1. Section 02

    Decision

    The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for creation of first floor balcony at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 23/01620FULL, subject to the following conditions:

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

    The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with drawing numbers DR1, DR2 and 22214/01A.

    Prior to the installation of any external lighting on the balcony hereby permitted, full details including height, design, location and intensity of the external lighting shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The lighting installation shall then be carried out in accordance with the approved details and maintained as such thereafter.

  2. Section 03

    Main Issue

    The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area, having regard to its location in the New Forest National Park (NFNP) and the Western Escarpment Conservation Area (CA).

  3. Section 04

    Reasons

    The appeal site consists of a residential dwelling that has a single storey addition with a flat roof. The proposal is to use the flat roof as a balcony that would be facilitated by the installation of balustrading. A similar scheme was previously refused by the National Park Authority (NPA) in July 20231. The appeal proposal includes the positioning of planters around the edge of the balcony in an attempt to address the previous refusal by the NPA. [address] Authority application reference 23/00508FULL

    In accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework), great weight should be given to conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty in protected landscapes. Moreover, I am conscious of my duty to seek to further the two statutory purposes of the National Park, which are to conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the area, and to promote opportunities for the understanding and enjoyment of the special qualities of the National Park by the public.

    Part of the NFNP’s special qualities are its outstanding natural beauty and a unique historic, cultural and archaeological heritage. In terms of the landscape area around the site, the Ancient Forest Farmlands and [name] and Dwellings area is characterised by traditional settlements with retained historic building styles and landscape settings, which includes traditional grazing land. There is also a strong local vernacular of red brick cottages and farmsteads surrounded by small enclosed fields.

    The dwelling is situated within the CA and countryside to the south of Godshill. According to the Western Escarpment Conservation Area Character Appraisal (CACA), the use of the site as a farmstead had its origins in the 13 th Century, but the dwelling is more contemporary. The site itself has significant mature planting on the boundaries of the property and the dwelling therefore benefits from considerable screening.

    The Framework requires that when considering the impact of proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. Additionally, in accordance with the statutory duty set out in Section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, I have paid special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the CA.

    The CACA confirms that the CA encompasses numerous settlements including Godshill. The significance of the CA derives in part from its landscape and historic dispersed settlement pattern. The CA retains its character as a series of dispersed linear rural settlements, and has a unique cultural identity, topography and landscape, developed over more than a thousand years.

    The proposed balustrading would be constructed from glass between stainless steel posts. I acknowledge that the development would be a relatively modern addition to the existing built form of the dwelling that appears to have some historical interest. However, it would be constructed on a flat roof and adjacent to a conservatory, which are existing modern parts of the building that have limited historical interest. As such, the balcony would at least conserve, and make an arguable improvement to, the character and appearance of that part of the dwelling and its immediate setting. Furthermore, the substantial screening of the site would also help to reduce the visual impact of the development on the wider area.

    I note the concerns about light spill from the balcony and the doors that would provide access to it. However, light that would be associated with use of the proposed balcony would be likely to be experienced in conjunction with existing artificial light emanating from the conservatory, a higher gable end window and rooflights serving the dwelling. Accordingly, with an appropriately worded condition to restrict the installation of external lighting without prior approval from the NPA, the development would not result in a materially harmful increase in light pollution that would be detrimental to the character and appearance of the area.

    Taking the above factors into account, the development would conserve and enhance the character and appearance of the NFNP, and the extent to which this contributes to its special qualities. The proposal would also conserve the significance and historical interest of the CA.

    For these reasons, the proposed development would not have a harmful effect on the character and appearance of the area, having regard to its location in the NFNP and the CA. Consequently, the proposal would comply with Policies DP2, DP18, SP15 and SP16 of the New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016 – 2036, which collectively seek, in part, that development is appropriate and sympathetic in terms of scale, appearance and form, respects the natural, built and historic environment and landscape character and reduces the impacts of light pollution on the ‘dark skies’ of the National Park to prevent artificial lighting from eroding rural darkness and tranquillity. The proposal would also comply with the Framework’s landscape and historic environment protection policies.

  4. Section 05

    [name]

    Godshill Parish Council stated that the proposed development would have a detrimental impact on local wildlife, particularly birds and bats. I acknowledge that the installation of doors to provide access to the balcony and potential external lighting on the balcony may create light spill. However, a condition requiring details of external lighting to be approved by the NPA would provide control over the impact on protected species, particularly bats. With the attachment of the appropriately worded condition, the material increase in light spill would be minimal and there would not be a harmful effect on protected species.

  5. Section 06

    Conditions

    The NPA have suggested various conditions in the event that I am minded to allow the appeal. I have considered these against the six tests set out in the Framework and Planning Practice Guidance and made changes to the wording to add clarity and preciseness as appropriate.

    The standard time limit condition and a condition listing the approved plans are necessary for planning certainty. A condition requiring the installation of external lighting to be carried out in accordance with pre-approved details is necessary and reasonable in the interests of character and appearance and the site’s location within the NFNP and the CA.

  6. Section 07

    Conclusion

    For the reasons given above 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 4657No official casework-database value to compare
    Extracted decision date · page 1
    23 January 2025Matches the official casework database
    Extracted site visit dates
    26 November 2024 (page 1)

Reference and authority

Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.

Case reference
3344779
Application reference
23/01620FULL
Lead case reference
Not recorded
Planning authority
New Forest
Planning authority code
E26000009

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
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
21 May 2024
Valid date
21 May 2024
Start date
12 July 2024
Planning authority decision date
21 March 2024
Appeal decision date
23 January 2025

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
63339
First seen
20 August 2026 at 14:25
Last seen
20 August 2026 at 16:28
Removed from release
Not recorded
Record created
20 August 2026 at 14:25
Record updated
24 August 2026 at 16:21