Appeal 3279589
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
formation of loft conversion with dormer window and velux roof lights with associated internal alterations.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for formation of loft conversion with dormer window and velux roof lights with associated internal alterations at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 21/00789/HOUSE, dated 31 March 2021, subject to the following conditions:
The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision.
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Drawing no. 03 E.
The tiles to be used in the construction of the dormer window hereby permitted shall match those on the roof of the existing dwelling.
Section 03
Application for costs
An application for costs was made by [name] against West Berkshire Council. This application is the subject of a separate decision.
Section 04
[name]
The main issues are the effects of the proposed dormer window on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and the local street scene.
Section 05
Reasons
The appeal relates to a modern two-storey, detached house which lies at the end of a short private cul-de-sac serving three other properties off [address]. The dwelling is orientated gable-on to the [address] and it is set back behind dense roadside planting which creates an effective screen from the [address] throughout the year, even when the trees are not in leaf.
The proposed dormer window would be constructed using plain tiles to match the existing roof and zinc cladding with vertical standing seams on the walls. It would be positioned almost centrally within the roof slope on the southern side elevation. The structure would be set away from the roof edges and eaves, and it would sit below the main ridge. This would ensure that the dormer reads as a subordinate and proportionate addition to the roof. It would not imbalance the front elevation of the property, as has been suggested by the Council.
The Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance: ‘[name] (2004) states that dormer windows should not be used to increase floorspace within the dwelling. However, that is not the purpose of the appeal scheme which has been designed to achieve headroom above the staircase to comply with the Building Regulations. This would create a larger volume than traditional gabled dormers, examples of which are seen elsewhere in [address]. Nevertheless, the scale of the new dormer would not be unduly dominant and its appearance would be acceptable. The discreet position of the dwelling behind landscaping means that public visibility would be limited to a short stretch of [address] from where the development would be viewed at a distance. The street scene of the [address] would be unaffected.
The Council has recently granted permission1 for a dormer window at 4 [address] Cottages which lies two doors away to the north. The approved design resulted from negotiation and has very strong similarities to the appeal scheme. That dormer will be considerably more prominent in comparison to the one being proposed at [site address] . The Council’s decision for No 4, which was made in the context of the same development plan policy and guidance, is a material consideration to which I have attached significant weight.
I conclude that the proposed dormer would harmonise with the character and appearance of the host dwelling and it would not cause any material harm to the local street scene. There would be compliance with Policies CS14 and CS19 of the [name] 2006-2026 insofar as these seek high quality design that responds to local character.
Section 06
Conditions
To provide certainty, I have attached a condition specifying the approved plan. I have also imposed a condition requiring the use of matching roof tiles, to secure harmonious architectural treatment.
Section 07
Conclusion
For the reasons given above 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 106No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 23 December 2021Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 6 December 2021 (page 1)
Costs Decision
- Extracted inspector · page 1
- Inspector attribution ID 106No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 23 December 2021Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 6 December 2021 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3279589
- Application reference
- 21/00789/HOUSE
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- West Berkshire District Council
- Planning authority code
- E06000037
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
- 31 m²
- 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
- 23 July 2021
- Valid date
- 3 August 2021
- Start date
- 5 October 2021
- Planning authority decision date
- 20 May 2021
- Appeal decision date
- 23 December 2021
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
- Yes
- 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
- 8178
- 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