Appeal 6007162
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
7 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 a single storey front extension with alterations to front porch, altering from flat roof to pitch roof.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a single storey front extension with alterations to front porch, altering from flat roof to pitch roof, in accordance with the terms of the application Ref: H/25/100649, subject to the following conditions:
The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Existing and [name] (KC 01); Existing and [name] (KC 02 [name]); and Proposed Block Plan (KC 03).
The materials used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match those of the existing dwelling.
Section 03
Preliminary Matters
I have used the description of the appeal proposal from the decision notice as I consider this better reflects the proposed development before me.
The decision notice does not specifically mention the policies from the Eastleigh Borough Local Plan (April 2022) that the Council considers there is a conflict with. However, I have been provided with a copy of Policy DM1 (General criteria for new development) and its supporting text through the appeal paperwork by the Council and this policy is also referred to in the [name]. I have therefore determined the proposal on the basis that it is Policy DM1 that is considered of relevance to this case.
Section 04
Main Issue
The main issue is the effects of the appeal proposal on the character and appearance of the appeal property and the wider area.
Section 05
Reasons
The appeal property (No.34) is a C20 two storey dwelling located part way along [address], which consists of a mix of single storey and two storey properties. No.34 itself is located at a transitional point from single storey to two storey properties, it has also been extended to its side in a two-storey form.
There is some consistency in the style of the house types along [address] near to No.34, but nonetheless various householder adaptations have taken place over time, including extensions to the front elevations such as at No.14 to the north-west, whereby some of the original consistency of the properties has been reduced.
[name] appreciate the proposal would result in a variation to the appearance of the similarly styled two storey properties in the immediate vicinity to No. 34, I am not of a view that the differentiation that would take place would result in poor design or harm to the character and appearance of No.34 or the wider area. To my mind the proposed alterations are relatively modest and would assimilate well into the site context.
Therefore, I find that the appeal proposal would align with Policy DM1 of the Eastleigh Borough Local Plan (April 2022) and Section 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework (December 2024), which amongst other matters, seek well-designed development that respects the site and its surroundings through its scale, massing, materials, design, density, layout, character and visual appearance.
Section 06
Conditions
The standard time limit is required together with a condition listing the plans in the interests of certainty. I have also included a condition requiring that the materials to be used match those of No. 34.
Section 07
Conclusions
For all of the above reasons, having regard to all matters raised, and subject to the specified conditions, I conclude that the appeal should be allowed.
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 4127No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 8 May 2026Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 29 April 2026 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 6007162
- Application reference
- H/25/100649
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Eastleigh Borough Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000086
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
- 372 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
- Allowed
- Decision category
- Allowed
- Received date
- 27 March 2026
- Valid date
- 27 March 2026
- Start date
- 1 April 2026
- Planning authority decision date
- 10 March 2026
- Appeal decision date
- 8 May 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
- 88526
- 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