Appeal 3277251
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
described as conversion of garage roof from a flat roof to a pitched roof to create an office space and shower room.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for conversion of garage roof from a flat roof to a pitched roof to create an office space and shower room at [name], [address], Icklingham, [site address] [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/21/0550/HH, dated 12/03/2021, and the plans submitted with it, subject to conditions set out below.
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: Proposed elevations and floor plans drawing no 2021-01-BD2 [name] and Site location plan drawing no 2021-01-BD3.
Section 03
Procedural Matter
The Council altered the description of development, this is also the description used by the Appellant on the appeal form. I consider this to be a more accurate description of the appeal proposal and accordingly I have adopted the amended description in the heading above rather than the Appellants application form description of development.
Since the determination of the application the National Planning Policy Framework 2021 (the Framework) has been published. The revised Framework does not diverge significantly from the previous version with regard to relevance to this appeal. No party has been prejudiced or caused any injustice by me proceeding with the appeal in light of this change in policy.
Section 04
[name]
The main issue in this appeal is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance on the area and the host dwelling.
Section 05
Reasons
The site is a detached property on a corner plot within a small group of residential dwellings. Predominately properties along the A1101 ([address]) are built up to the footpath, the appeal property has a front garden with the built form set back from the highway.
A high wall extends from the property and wraps around a small external courtyard connecting to the existing large garage. There are limited views of the garage from [address] due to the screening the wall provides.
Policy DM24 of the Forest Heath and St Edmundsbury Local Plan, Joint Development Management Policies Document (2015) (the Local Plan) requires alterations or extensions to existing dwellings in the countryside to be subordinate in scale and proportion to the original dwelling. The proposed extension and alterations will increase the prominence of the garage.
The materials for the pitched roof would be similar to the existing dwelling, however cladding is proposed to the gable which would give a rural outbuilding appearance. This combined with the set back of the proposed development, the slight increase in ground levels from the host dwelling and the orientation of the garage which is largely screened from view, I find that the bulk of the extension would be read as a separate building. Whilst visually the proposed development would not be subordinate to the existing dwelling, it would also not be viewed as an attached extension.
In the context that the existing built form of the appeal site is different to other properties within [address] and set back from the building line, the proposed development would not be incongruous to the streetscene.
I find that the proposed development would not harm the character and appearance of the area and the host dwelling.
There is no conflict with Policies DM2, DM24 of the Local Plan and Policy CS5 of the Forest Heath Local Development Framework, Core Strategy Development Plan Documents 2001-2026 (with housing projected to 2031) (2010) which seek amongst other things to ensure development respects character, scale and density of the locality.
There is also no conflict with the Framework which seeks to ensure developments are of good design appropriate and sympathetic to their surroundings.
Section 06
Conclusion and Conditions
I have imposed a standard condition relating to the commencement of development. I have included a condition specifying the relevant plans which include the external materials proposed as this provides certainty.
For the above reasons I conclude that this 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 126No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 4 February 2022Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 4 January 2022 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3277251
- Application reference
- DC/21/0550/HH
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- West Suffolk
- Planning authority code
- E07000245
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
- 55 m²
- Number of residences
- 0
- 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
- 17 June 2021
- Valid date
- 17 June 2021
- Start date
- 24 September 2021
- Planning authority decision date
- 20 May 2021
- Appeal decision date
- 4 February 2022
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
- 9998
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:25
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21