Appeal 3359883
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
5 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 replacement of existing windows and doors in 3 phases.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the replacement of existing windows and doors at [site address] , Aughton, Lancashire [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 2024/0749/FUL and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following conditions:
The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision.
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 2673/PH/1 2673/PH/2 and 2673/PH/3.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue in this appeal is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area having regard to its conservation area status.
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal property, No [site address] , (No 6) is a detached inter-war property situate within the Granville Park Conservation Area(GPCA) where there is a statutory duty to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character of the area. In addition, the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) states that great weight should be attached to the conservation of designated heritage assets, in this case the GPCA.
No full conservation area analysis is before me but from the information before me and my observations on my site visit, the special characteristics of the GPCA are the setting of predominantly large Victorian villas within generous plot sizes in a serpentine layout in a mature verdant setting. There is considerable diversity in the style and design of the dwellings and several dwellings have benefitted from contemporary extensions or alterations incorporating large areas of glass, and modern features and materials. The use of timber is no longer a consistent feature within the GPCA and there are examples of UPVC windows replacement in several of the dwellings. Taken together, the wide variety of contemporary redevelopment, and mix of materials contribute significantly to the present day character of the GPCA.
No 6 is one of several inter-war dwellings described as having a positive impact on the character of the GPCA. It stands well back from the highway within a generous plot. An UPVC conservatory granted permission in 2002 has been erected at the side of the dwelling. Properties closest to No 6 and which provide much of the immediate visual context, including No [address], which is of a similar design to No 6, have had UPVC windows fitted.
From the officer report and information before me, it seems that the use of UPVC windows on the rear elevations of No 6 is not ruled out per se and may be considered to be acceptable to the Council. I accept that the proposed replacement UPVC windows would subtly alter the character and appearance of No 6 and hence the GPCA. However the dwelling is set well back from the highway, is well screened by mature landscaping and the majority of the windows would be largely shielded from views and be unobtrusive in the street scene. The submitted drawings show the maintenance of existing fenestration design and types. Given the distances and screening from the highway, and other nearby examples, the modern materials would not in my view materially detract from the character of the dwelling and the wider area. As such the proposal would not cause harm to the character and appearance of the GPCA.
I therefore conclude that the proposed replacement windows would have a neutral effect that would preserve the character and appearance of the GPCA causing no harm to its significance. Accordingly the question of public benefits to outweigh any harm does not arise. As such I find no conflict with the Framework or Local Plan Policies GN3 and EN4 of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 (adopted October 2013) which require development proposals to have regard to the historic character and to seek to preserve or enhance the heritage asset.
Section 05
Conditions and Conclusion
I have attached a plans and time condition in the interest of certainty. For the reasons outlined above I allow the appeal.
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 1974No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 28 April 2025Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 15 April 2025 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3359883
- Application reference
- 2024/0749/FUL
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- West Lancashire District Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000127
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
- 31 January 2025
- Valid date
- 3 February 2025
- Start date
- 20 February 2025
- Planning authority decision date
- 10 January 2025
- Appeal decision date
- 28 April 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
- 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
- 68604
- 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