Appeal 3376250
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
approval of reserved matters (appearance, landscaping, layout, and scale sought) for [name] for the erection of 4no. commercial buildings, comprising 64 units with associated access, parking and landscaping pursuant to 23/502119/OUT.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and the approval Ref 25/501377/REM given to the details pursuant to condition No 2 of an outline planning permission Ref 23/502119/OUT given on 17 November 2023 by Maidstone Borough Council is varied by deleting condition 9.
Section 03
Applications for Costs
An application for costs was made by [name] against Maidstone Borough Council. This application is the subject of a separate decision.
Section 04
Background and Procedural Matter
Outline planning permission was granted by the Council for a “new business park of up to 46,447 sqm of B1(c), B2 and B8 accommodation with associated access, parking and infrastructure works”. In 2023, Condition 21 of the permission was varied under Section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended), to allow the occupation of 14,000 sqm prior to the provision of capacity improvements to a junction. Condition 2 of the outline permission requires the submission of reserved matters for approval by the Council. The matters for consideration under the reserved matters application the subject of this appeal were appearance, landscaping, layout and scale.
Condition 35 of the outline permission requires all buildings to achieve a ‘[name] Construction 2014 rating, with a final certificate to be issued to the local planning authority for written approval within 6 months of the first occupation of any building.
I have been referred to a recent [address] judgment [name] & Son Limited v SSHCLG [2025] UKSC 35. Amongst other things, this sets out that where approval for reserved matters in an outline planning permission is given subject to further conditions, those sub-conditions have to fall within the ambit of the reserved matters as defined by the conditions set out in the outline permission. As such, it is not open to a local planning authority to revisit matters which have been approved in principle at outline stage.
Condition 9 does not relate to the reserved matters in question, falling outside the scope of matters for consideration at reserved matters stage. The Council considers the condition is justified, in part, in the interests of ensuring an appropriate appearance, for example through the potential for solar panels on the roofs of the buildings. Nevertheless, the requirements of the condition go above and beyond matters of appearance, relating to operational energy performance and infrastructure. This goes beyond the ambit of the reserved matters and it was not open to the Council to add this condition.
Given my conclusions above, it is not necessary for me to go on to consider whether the condition is reasonable and necessary with regard to securing the provision of on-site renewable or low carbon energy.
Section 05
Other Matters
I note the comments of interested parties regarding the potential for solar panels on the roofs of the proposed buildings. However, as set out above, the outline permission established the principle of development with specific matters to be agreed at a later stage. These reserved matters did not include renewable or low carbon energy requirements.
Section 06
Conclusion
For the reasons given above I conclude that the appeal should succeed. I will vary the reserved matters by deleting the disputed condition.
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 5181No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 10 February 2026Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 27 January 2026 (page 1)
Costs Decision
- Extracted inspector · page 1
- Inspector attribution ID 5181No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 10 February 2026Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 27 January 2026 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3376250
- Application reference
- 25/501377/REM
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Maidstone Borough Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000110
Casework details
The casework, procedure, development and linking details supplied by the official record.
- Casework type
- Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development type
- Major general industry/storage/warehousing
- Appeal type reason
- 4. Grant planning permission for the development subject to conditions to which you object
- Appeal reason
- Appeal Against Conditions
- 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
- 1
- 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
- 25 November 2025
- Valid date
- 25 November 2025
- Start date
- 5 December 2025
- Planning authority decision date
- 30 July 2025
- Appeal decision date
- 10 February 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
- 84131
- 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