Appeal 3348325
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
the erection of front porch.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the erection of front porch at [site address] , [site address] , Bristol, [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application Ref P24/01070/HH, subject to the conditions set out in the attached Schedule to this decision.
Section 03
Main issue
The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the host property and its surroundings.
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal property stands at the end of a short terrace of 3 dwellings within a relatively modern and well-designed residential estate. The appellant intends moving the dwelling’s main pedestrian entrance from the side to the front and this would be enclosed by a porch. As the Council rightly says, the porch would be the first of its type in the immediate vicinity, and it considers the proposal would ‘form a visually intrusive feature in the street scene’ causing a loss of symmetry in the terrace.
One of the main elements contributing positively to the quality of the local townscape is the extent of local planting and landscaping. This proves effective in providing greenery which softens and partly screens much of the built development. Several maturing trees grow in the green sward alongside the highway fronting the appeal property and its neighbours, as does a high, thick hedge.
The appeal property is set back from [name]. It is separated from the highway by the hedge and other planting. These would effectively screen the porch from view from most viewpoints along [name] and [address]. Although the first of its type, this is insufficient reason to refuse permission, particularly since I find the porch to be well-designed, modest in scale, and would prove to be barely noticeable in the public realm.
I conclude that the proposed development would fit acceptably into its local context without harming the character and appearance of the host property or its surroundings. Accordingly, no conflict arises with those provisions of policies CS1 of the [site address] Local Plan: [name] (December
and PSP38 of the [site address] Local Plan: Policies, Sites and Places Plan (November 2017) directed to promote and encourage high quality design generally, specifically in residential extensions.
Section 05
Conditions
In the interests of visual amenity, I shall impose the Council’s suggested condition in respect of external materials.
It is also necessary, in the interests of certainty, that the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans.
Section 06
Other matters
All other matters referred to in the representations have been taken into consideration, but no other matter raised is of such strength or significance as to outweigh the considerations that led me to my conclusions.
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
- 6 November 2024Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 3 October 2024 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3348325
- Application reference
- P24/01070/HH
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- South Gloucestershire Council
- Planning authority code
- E06000025
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
- No
- Affects setting of a listed building
- No
- Historic building grant made
- No
- Relates to a conservation area
- Yes
- Flooding is an issue
- No
- Site within an AONB
- No
- Site within an SSSI
- No
Decision and dates
The published outcome and every imported case date.
- Official decision
- Allowed
- Decision category
- Allowed
- Received date
- 17 July 2024
- Valid date
- 17 July 2024
- Start date
- 20 August 2024
- Planning authority decision date
- 14 June 2024
- Appeal decision date
- 6 November 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
- 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
- 59594
- 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