Appeal 3364338
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
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
a 2 storey side extension. Part two and part single storey rear extensions. Front bay window extension and two new dormer windows to front elevation. Fenestration and material alterations to the existing house.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a 2 storey side extension. Part two and part single storey rear extensions. Front bay window extension and two new dormer windows to front elevation. Fenestration and material alterations to the existing house at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 24/03578/APP and the plans submitted with it, subject to the conditions set out in the attached schedule.
Section 03
Procedural Matter
One of the Council’s reasons for refusal relates to bats. I consider that in this case, matters relating to bats, a protected species, can be addressed via an appropriate condition. The Council proposed an appropriate condition in this regard.
The appeal property is a Non-Designated Heritage Asset located within the Haddenham Conservation Area. The Council is satisfied that the proposed development would not result in any harm to heritage assets and has stated that, in heritage terms, the proposal complies with national policy and with Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan (2021) Policy BE1.
Section 04
Main Issue
The main issue in this case is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area.
Section 05
Reasons
The appeal property is a two storey detached dwelling that has been extended to the rear. It is narrow in width and is situated within an irregular shaped plot which extends a considerable distance to the rear of the dwelling.
The dwelling fronts [address] and is situated within a largely residential area in Haddenham Conservation Area, which in this location is characterised by the presence of predominantly residential buildings including attractive period dwellings demonstrating traditional vernacular features. Dwellings face out on to [address] and tend to have long gardens to the rear.
During my site visit, I observed that numerous dwellings in the area appeared to be extended to the rear and I also noted the presence of large ancillary buildings located to the rear of dwellings.
The proposed development would extend the appeal dwelling to the side and rear and include significant changes to the front of the dwelling. The Council has stated that the proposed changes to the front elevation are acceptable in principle and would not be harmful to local character.
The existing extension to the rear of the appeal dwelling appears as a rather poor quality addition of unattractive appearance. This would be replaced by development purposefully designed to step down from and appear subservient to the host dwelling.
Whilst the proposal as a whole would add considerable volume to the original dwelling, I find that the stepping-down in height and gradation in scale to the side and most notably, to the rear would combine with the use of an appropriate palette of sympathetic materials in keeping with the host dwelling and surrounding buildings.
Further to the above, during my site visit I noted the presence of tall rear boundary walls, above which could be seen the roofs and taller elements of neighbouring buildings. I find that the upper areas of the proposed rear and side extension would appear above its boundary walls in a similar way and in doing so, the proposed development would appear to integrate well with its neighbours.
I am also mindful that the rear of the appeal property extends for a considerable distance. Thus, whilst the proposed development would increase the size of the appeal dwelling, it would do so in a manner that would respect the immediate context of the building, retaining a spacious garden area to the rear.
Taking all of the above into account, I find that the proposed development would not harm the character and appearance of the area and would not be contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework; to Policy BE2 of the Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan (2021); or to the Council’s Design Supplementary Planning Document (2023), which together amongst other things, seek to protect local character.
Section 06
Conditions
I have considered the conditions against the tests set out in Paragraph 57 of the Framework. I find that a condition specifying materials is necessary in the interests of local character.
A condition controlling the glazing and opening of the first floor ensuite bathroom window on the eastern elevation is necessary in the interests of protecting the privacy and amenity of neighbouring occupiers. A condition requiring appropriate bat surveys and measures is necessary as there are known populations of bats, a protected species, in the surrounding area.
Section 07
Conclusion
For the reasons given above, the appeal is successful.
The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision;
The external materials to be used in the construction of the development hereby permitted shall be as specified on the submitted [name] received by the local planning authority on 29 November 2024;
Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted, the window to serve an ensuite bathroom at first floor level on the eastern side elevation of the dwelling, as shown on the plans and hereby permitted, shall not be glazed or reglazed other than with obscured glass to a minimum of level 3 and non-opening, unless parts of the window that can be opened are more than 1.7m above internal floor level, and shall thereafter be retained as such in perpetuity;
Prior to the commencement of any works of development, a preliminary bat roost assessment to determine whether bats are present and the extent to which they are using the property, shall be undertaken by a qualified ecologist. In the instance the preliminary assessment confirms bats are present, further surveys shall be undertaken by a qualified ecologist to determine how the species will be affected by the development, how this can be mitigated or compensated for, the securing of any necessary [name] licence and the ecological enhancement measures that are required under the NPPF. No development shall commence on site until the results of the assessment and surveys have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Thereafter, the development shall be undertaken in accordance with the recommendations and mitigation measures contained within the approved assessment and surveys. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 601No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 24 June 2025Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 10 June 2025 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3364338
- Application reference
- 24/03578/APP
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Buckinghamshire Council - Aylesbury Area *
- Planning authority code
- E07000004
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
- 69 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
- 19 April 2025
- Valid date
- 19 April 2025
- Start date
- 24 April 2025
- Planning authority decision date
- 29 January 2025
- Appeal decision date
- 24 June 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
- 71753
- 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