Appeal 3367181
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
4 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
rear/side extension, roof alterations including addition of dormer to accommodate new first floor, internal & fenestration alterations.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue in this case is its effect on the character and appearance of the area.
Section 04
Reasons
[site address] is a detached bungalow located on the corner of [address] and [address]. It occupies a long plot which extends to the rear/side along [address] within which there is a garage and a large static caravan style structure. A high timber fence marks the boundary with [address] and the footpath along the eastern side of the site. The surrounding area is characterised by a variety of dwellings, many of which are bungalows, some of which have been extended or altered in various ways including dormer windows.
The main policy relevant in this case is CS41 of the Bournemouth Local Plan Core Strategy, adopted 2012 (the [name]), which relates to design and, among other things, requires development to respect the site and its surroundings through its scale, character and appearance.
I consider that the size, design and siting of the proposed extension would be out of keeping with the existing building itself and unsympathetic to the prevailing style and proportions of the surrounding dwellings. The increased height of the roof over the existing rear element and the introduction of a gable would result in a discordant feature in this prominent position on the street corner. Its impact would be further exacerbated by the proposed large flat roofed dormer with fenestration which would relate poorly to the pattern of fenestration on the ground floor.
I have taken account of the extension to [address] which was permitted in 2019 in the context of the same development plan policy currently in effect. It is similar in many respects to the proposal, but in my view, the size and siting and the long horizontal emphasis of the flat roof dormer facing [address], together with the gable end, are wholly out of character with the prevailing pattern of steep roof forms which are characteristic of the area. It is an established planning principle that each case is determined on its merits, and I consider that this is not a suitable example to follow at the appeal site, particularly in view of its prominent location on a corner. If it were to be repeated in the area, I consider that the resultant cumulative effect would harm the character and appearance of the area.
I conclude that the proposal would fail to respect the scale, character and appearance of the existing building and the surrounding area, contrary to [name] policy CS41.
For the reasons given above, the appeal is dismissed.
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 764No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 28 August 2025Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 20 August 2025 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3367181
- Application reference
- P/25/00676/HOU
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole
- Planning authority code
- E06000058
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
- 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
- Dismissed
- Decision category
- Dismissed
- Received date
- 6 June 2025
- Valid date
- 6 June 2025
- Start date
- 10 June 2025
- Planning authority decision date
- 22 May 2025
- Appeal decision date
- 28 August 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
- 75416
- 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