Appeal 3374600
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
6 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
replacement of single glazed wooden sash windows in ground and first floor bays on front elevation with double glazed deep rail heritage sash windows.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for replacement of single glazed wooden sash windows in ground and first floor bays on front elevation with double glazed deep rail heritage sash windows at [site address] , [site address] , Stockport, [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/095451 and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following condition:
The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision.
Section 03
Procedural Matter
The original proposal, as referred to on the application form, included the replacement of uPVC bathroom window with double glazed heritage sash window and replacement of existing uPVC porch door and side panel with double glazed uPVC porch door and side panel. These elements were removed from the proposal.
Section 04
Main Issue
The main issue in this case is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the [site address] Conservation Area.
Section 05
Reasons
The appeal property is a semi-detached three-storey Victorian brick-built dwelling with a steeply pitched roof and with full height bays and half-timbered gables to the front elevation. It is located in a residential area along [address], close to its junction with [address].
The appeal dwelling is set well back from [address], behind a brick wall, tall pillars, a driveway and a front garden. It is partially obscured from [address] behind trees and planting. As such, whilst tall, the dwelling does not appear close to or especially prominently along [address]’s frontage. The attached neighbouring dwelling, Number [address] appears a little more prominently in its surroundings, due to its side elevation facing towards [address].
The appeal property is located within the [site address] Conservation Area which is characterised by the presence of a range of attractive 19th and early 20th Century buildings set within a landscape notable for its steep hillsides, planned parkland and waterside settings.
The appeal dwelling dates back to the 19th Century and retains the majority of its period features, including those mentioned above, as well as original sash windows. During my site visit, I noted that whilst the position of the appeal dwelling, as described, results in the detailing of the sash windows being difficult to see from the public domain, the overall appearance of the windows do appear notably different from those of the adjoining dwelling, Number 47. Number 47’s windows comprise modern double-glazed uPVC windows and detract from the overall appearance of the two adjoining dwellings.
It is proposed to replace the appeal dwelling’s windows with double glazed uPVC heritage sash windows. The proposed replacement windows would have a very similar overall appearance to the original windows to be replaced. The difference in material – replacing wood with uPVC – would not be readily discernible from the public domain and would also be relatively hard to distinguish by anything other than a close inspection from within the appeal site.
Given the above, I find that the proposal would comprise a visually sensitive solution to replacing windows subject to rot and weather damage. The proposed new windows would only be observed in distant glimpses from which highly detailed elements would not be discernible and from where their heritage qualities would appear in keeping with the historical appearance of the host dwelling. No harm at all would arise in respect of the character and appearance of the [site address] Conservation Area.
Taking all of the above into account, I find that the proposed development would preserve the character and appearance of the [site address] Conservation Area. The proposal would not be contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework; to [name]-1, SIE-3 or CS8 of the Stockport Core Strategy Development Plan Document (2011); or to saved Policies HC1.3 or CDH1.8 of the Stockport Unitary Development Plan Review (2006, saved 2009), which together amongst other things, seek to protect local character.
Section 06
Conclusion
For the reasons given above, the appeal is successful.
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
- 21 November 2025Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 11 November 2025 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3374600
- Application reference
- DC/095451
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
- Planning authority code
- E08000007
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
- 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
- Allowed
- Decision category
- Allowed
- Received date
- 14 October 2025
- Valid date
- 14 October 2025
- Start date
- 21 October 2025
- Planning authority decision date
- 22 July 2025
- Appeal decision date
- 21 November 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
- 80207
- 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