Appeal 3346247
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
8 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
an upward extension to provide enlarged first floor, plus extension to rear.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for an upward extension to provide enlarged first floor, plus extension to rear at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application Ref 24/00177/FUL subject to the conditions set out in the attached Schedule.
Section 03
Preliminary matter
Amended plans were presented during the course of the determination, and it is these that formed the basis of the Council’s decision.
Section 04
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the development on the street scene.
Section 05
Reasons
The Council describe the proposal to extend the bungalow as ‘transformative’ in the sense that its scale and appearance would be wholly altered. I do not disagree with the Council’s description – the proposals involve substantial additions and the finished product, if built, would appear significantly different to the existing property.
[address] is a lengthy road, wherein several examples of extensions of varying sizes, new dwellings, including infill are apparent. I take it from what I saw that in the application of its policies the Council does not object in principle to new development, even when it may look different to other development in close proximity. This may explain, in part, the presence of a variety of house types with differing designs on either frontage. The street has far from a unified appearance, but nevertheless presents a pleasant residential ambience.
Sometimes in the street single bungalows sit alongside two storey houses, but in the case of the appeal property it is one of several bungalows standing alongside one another on the southern frontage of [address] from its junction with [address] eastwards. Further eastwards, and also opposite, two storey dwellings are much in evidence, but the Council considers that the appeal property relates more to the bungaloid development to its west. Principally for this reason the Council considers that the scale of the development and the changed appearance of the appeal property would harm the character and appearance of its surroundings.
I understand the basis of the Council’s concern but do not share it. Such is the eclectic nature and appearance of development along the street, that the proposal would make little impact on its overall character and appearance, even though the property would in effect be changed from a bungalow to a two storey dwelling. The bungalow stands in a wider plot than most alongside, so the increased scale may be more easily accommodated. The amended design is of good quality, with twin front gables and hipped roof. It would add another but entirely acceptable design variation to the street.
I therefore conclude that the proposal would fit harmoniously into the street scene. Accordingly, no conflict arises with those provisions of policies CS9 &CS20 of the Stratford-on-Avon District Core Strategy (CS) directed to ensure that the design of development should be sensitive to local setting, existing built form, ensuring local distinctiveness whilst preserving local character.
Section 06
Conditions
The Council’s suggested condition that the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans shall be imposed in the interests of certainty. The Council’s suggested condition on materials shall not be imposed since materials not matching those of the existing dwelling are proposed. In the interests of visual amenity and in the absence of a comprehensive schedule, an alternative condition in respect of materials is imposed.
The Council’s suggested sustainability enhancement condition is imposed in the interests of encouraging sustainable development. An additional condition is imposed in the interests of biodiversity gain.
Section 07
Other matters
Representations were submitted by a neighbour in respect of concerns as to the effect on living conditions. The objection is considered in some detail in the officer report on the application, and I share the officer assessment on this aspect. No other matter raised in the representations is of such strength as to outweigh those which led me to my conclusions.
Section 08
Schedule of Conditions
The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision.
Prior to the commencement of development details of the materials to be used on all external elevations, windows, doors and the roof shall be submitted to the local planning authority for its approval, to be obtained in writing. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: location plan and plan Ref 1676-BP-01_C; 1676-P-01; 1676-P-02; 1676-P-03_F & 1676-P-04_F.
The development shall incorporate the sustainability measures contained in the [name] submitted with the application. Thereafter the incorporated sustainability measures shall be retained.
The development shall be carried out in accordance with the recommendations on ecological mitigation and enhancement contained in Section 5 of The Phase 1 Bat & [name], dated 30 August 2023 produced by Ridgeway Ecology Ltd.
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 2949No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 13 September 2024Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 30 August 2024 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3346247
- Application reference
- 24/00177/FUL
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Stratford-on-Avon District Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000221
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
- 180 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
- 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
- 13 June 2024
- Valid date
- 13 June 2024
- Start date
- 24 July 2024
- Planning authority decision date
- 31 May 2024
- Appeal decision date
- 13 September 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
- 57062
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:28
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21