Appeal 3367283
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
single storey side extension with lean-to structure. Introduction of new materials.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Procedural matter
The development the subject of this appeal has been carried out and completed.
Section 04
Main issue
I consider that the main issue in this case is its effect on the living conditions of neighbouring residents.
Section 05
Reasons
[site address] is a two storey detached house in an established residential area. It has a single storey rear extension across the full width of the original house. I understand that there was previously a large outbuilding in the rear garden adjacent to the boundary with No. 26.
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 and provide a high standard of amenity for residents.
The development the subject of this appeal includes a lean-to structure to the side, filling the gap between Nos. 28 and 26 and an enclosed flat roofed section finished externally in a dark metal cladding which extends towards the rear in line with the main rear extension. The Council raises no objections to the materials in terms of the impact of the development on the character and appearance of the area and I see no reason to disagree with this view, in terms of the street scene.
The rear section of the development fills the gap between the rear extension and the side boundary with No. 26, apart from a small space adjacent to the side wall of No. 26, and extends to the same length as the earlier extension, approximately 4.8m from the main rear elevation.
I consider that this part of the development has an overbearing presence due to its length, flat roof, dark materials and proximity to the boundary. Its height above the boundary fence, although not in itself excessive, exacerbates its impact. It increases the sense of enclosure in that part of the garden of No. 26 immediately adjacent to the house and appears as a dominant and unsightly feature highly visible from there and from within the house. I note that there was previously a large outbuilding at No. [address] to the boundary which was clearly visible from the rear of No. 26. However, on the basis of the information before me, it appears that this was further down the garden, in lighter coloured materials and less oppressive in appearance.
I conclude that the development has an overbearing impact on the outlook from No. 26 and is harmful to the living conditions of neighbouring residents. In this respect the development is contrary to [name] policy SC41.
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
- 3367283
- Application reference
- 7-2025-27943-A
- 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
- 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
- Dismissed
- Decision category
- Dismissed
- Received date
- 9 June 2025
- Valid date
- 9 June 2025
- Start date
- 12 June 2025
- Planning authority decision date
- 9 April 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
- 75417
- 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