Appeal 6004607
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
described as: “Proposed two storey rear extension with single storey rear & side”.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the living conditions of the occupiers of [address] with particular regard to privacy.
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal site is located in a residential area and comprises a detached dwelling and its rear garden. The layout of development in the area means that there is a degree of actual and perceived overlooking between properties.
During my site visit, I saw that the existing first-floor rear windows of the appeal property allow views of parts of the rear garden of [address]. However, due to the separation distance between the windows and the garden, together with the presence of a tall boundary fence, the part of the neighbouring garden closest to the fence is not currently visible from these windows.
The proposed extension would bring the first floor windows closer to the boundary with [address]. This would result in a materially different relationship between the appeal dwelling and the neighbouring garden and it would allow more of the neighbouring garden to be overlooked. This would cause harm to the actual and perceived privacy enjoyed by the occupiers of [address].
The submitted plans indicate the proposed first floor windows would have obscure glazing up to 1.5m above floor level. However, there would be nothing to prevent overlooking through the windows above this level, nor to prevent overlooking whilst the windows are open. As such, I am not satisfied that this would sufficiently mitigate the harm identified.
I acknowledge that no objection has been received from the occupiers of [address]. Nevertheless, a lack of objection does not equate to a lack of harm or potential future harm.
I appreciate that the appeal proposal is a revised scheme which seeks to overcome the reasons for refusal on a previous scheme. However, this does not materially affect my consideration of the merits of the appeal proposal.
Taking all of the above into account, I find that the proposal would harm the living conditions of the occupiers of [address], with particular regard to privacy. As such, the proposal conflicts with Policy SD14 of the Gloucester, Cheltenham and [name], 2017 and Policy RES10 of the Tewkesbury Borough Local Plan, 2022. Taken together, these policies require amongst other things, that new development, including extensions to existing dwellings, cause no harm to the amenity of neighbouring occupants.
Section 05
Conclusion
For the reasons given above, the proposal would conflict with the development plan and there are no material considerations that outweigh that conflict. Therefore, 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 4682No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 12 March 2026Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 23 February 2026 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 6004607
- Application reference
- 25/00726/FUL
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Tewkesbury Borough Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000083
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
- Not recorded
- Appeal reason
- refused
- Type detail
- Householder
- Jurisdiction
- No Jurisdiction Associated
- Link status
- Not recorded
Site and development
Published appeal-site measurements and planning designations, without the withheld precise location fields.
- Site area
- 0 hectares
- Floor space
- 246 m²
- Number of residences
- Not recorded
- Site in Green Belt
- No
- Agricultural holding
- Not recorded
- Affects setting of a listed building
- Yes
- 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
- 4 February 2026
- Valid date
- 4 February 2026
- Start date
- 10 February 2026
- Planning authority decision date
- 19 December 2025
- Appeal decision date
- 12 March 2026
Case administration
Published recovery, call-in, costs and enforcement information for this case.
- Redetermined
- Not recorded
- Bespoke
- Not recorded
- Date recovered
- Not recorded
- Date not recovered or derecovered
- Not recorded
- Call-in date
- Not recorded
- Costs applied for
- No
- 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
- Back Office
- Dataset status
- Current release
- Catalogue record ID
- 85818
- 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