Appeal 3372714
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
erection of a single storey side and rear extension, front extension to create bay window / porch. Demolition of conservatory and garage.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Preliminary Matters and Main Issue
Planning permission was previously granted, subject to conditions, for the erection of a single storey side and rear extension, and a front extension to create a bay window and porch1. The approved drawings show three car parking spaces would be provided to the front and side of the dwelling. At the time of my site visit, the extensions to the dwelling had been constructed, however only two parking spaces had been provided at the front of the dwelling and a wall and fence, which was not part of the original application, had been erected along the side boundary. The appellant seeks to vary condition 2 of the planning permission, which specifies the approved drawings, to include the two parking spaces and a 1-metre-tall fence to the side boundary.
The National Planning Policy Framework 2024 (the Framework) sets out that planning conditions should only be imposed where they are necessary, relevant to planning and to the development to be permitted, enforceable, precise and reasonable in all other respects. Although the Council’s advice in their email dated 8 September 2025 could have been clearer, an appeal under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) (the Act) can only vary or remove a condition which does not meet these tests.
The main issue therefore is whether condition 2 meets these tests, having regard to car parking provision and the boundary treatment. 1 Planning application ref. CB/25/00263/FULL
Section 04
Reasons
The Council determined the original planning application based on the drawings submitted at the time, and drawing No. 01C clearly shows that the scheme would include three parking spaces. This drawing was included in condition 2 to specify the approved drawings and to avoid doubt. The Council suggests that the amendments requested by the appellant may be acceptable in a resubmission of a full planning permission or an application to the Council under section 73 of the Act to vary the planning permission. Notwithstanding this, I nonetheless have no evidence before me to demonstrate that condition 2 in its current form, or that providing more than the minimum number of car parking spaces, would not meet the tests as set out in the Framework.
Furthermore, the Procedural Guide for planning appeals states that the appeal process should not be used to evolve a scheme, in this case by adding a fence which was not before the Council at the time of the original decision.
Section 05
Conclusion
For the reasons given above, I conclude that the appeal should be 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 5869No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 9 January 2026Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 12 November 2025 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3372714
- Application reference
- CB/25/00263/FULL
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Central Bedfordshire
- Planning authority code
- E06000056
Casework details
The casework, procedure, development and linking details supplied by the official record.
- Casework type
- Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development type
- Other minor developments
- Appeal type reason
- 4. Grant planning permission for the development subject to conditions to which you object
- Appeal reason
- Appeal Against Conditions
- Type detail
- Unknown
- 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
- 8 September 2025
- Valid date
- 8 September 2025
- Start date
- 18 September 2025
- Planning authority decision date
- 17 March 2025
- Appeal decision date
- 9 January 2026
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
- 82534
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:25
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:29
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:25
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21