Appeal 3281668
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
for a front dormer.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the appeal proposal upon the character and appearance of the area.
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal site is situated on the eastern side of [address] which comprises 3no blocks of terraced houses. A number of houses have undergone loft conversions by virtue of the installation of rooflights to their front roof slopes, however none have had dormer windows constructed on their principal elevations. Consequently the front roof planes along this side of the road are largely unbroken.
[name] acknowledge that extensions and alterations to dwellinghouses are considered acceptable in principle, I respectfully consider that this is a case of form following function. [name] note that the width of the proposed front dormer would align with the bay feature on the ground and first floor front elevation below, by virtue of its overall scale and design, it would appear as an incongruous feature, not only on the host dwelling, but within the wider street scene.
I have been given no reason to doubt that the proposal would become a family home for the long-term as opposed to being a speculative form of development; and I note the examples of other dormer windows that have been constructed within the wider locality; however whilst it is not for me to comment on the appropriateness of these or otherwise, ultimately each case must be assessed on its own merits.
Therefore, whilst I accept that the proposal would protect the living conditions of the occupants of neighbouring residential properties, the National Planning Policy Framework is quite clear in stating within its paragraph 126 that the creation of high quality, beautiful and sustainable buildings and places is fundamental to what the planning and development process should achieve. I consider the proposal by reason of its scale and position within the front roof slope would appear as a prominent and incongruous feature that would be harmful to the character and appearance of the area, contrary to Policy PCS23 of the Portsmouth Plan (2012) which, amongst other things, requires new development to be well designed, requiring development to be of an appropriate scale, appearance and materials in relation to the particular context, whilst seeking excellent architectural quality in new buildings and changes to existing ones.
Section 05
Conclusion
Having regard to the above and all other matters raised, including the responses to the appellants’ neighbour questionnaires, I conclude that the appeal be 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 297No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 14 January 2022Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 23 November 2021 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3281668
- Application reference
- 21/00154/HOU
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Portsmouth City Council
- Planning authority code
- E06000044
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
- 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
- Dismissed
- Decision category
- Dismissed
- Received date
- 25 August 2021
- Valid date
- 25 August 2021
- Start date
- 27 October 2021
- Planning authority decision date
- 18 June 2021
- Appeal decision date
- 14 January 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
- 8906
- 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