Appeal 3283710
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
two storey rear extension.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Main Issue
The effect of the proposal upon the living conditions of No. 7 and No. 9 Hillside, with particular regard to outlook.
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal building is a detached dwelling that occupies a narrow plot. It sits up against its western boundary and slightly in from its eastern boundary, with a narrow path to the side that provides rear access. The dwelling stands slightly higher than No. 7, which is to the east, and is at roughly the same level as No. 9, which is to the west. The rear gardens of these dwellings face north. Thus, garden areas are already shaded to a certain extent by the existing buildings. Unobstructed direct sunlight and daylight will thus be particularly valuable to the occupants of these dwellings in the early morning and late afternoon.
The proposal would extend the first floor of the existing dwelling to the rear across its full width, over the existing single storey extension. The extension would adopt the same height as the existing roof. It would extend back significantly beyond the rear elevations of the main two storey parts of these dwellings.
The side elevation of No. [address] to the boundary shared with the appeal dwelling. The extension would be dominant to the occupiers of this neighbouring dwelling. It would have an overbearing impact on the outlook from the first floor rooms at the rear, and the area of the garden closest to the rear of the dwelling. Owing to its scale, it would have an impact on daylight and direct sunlight reaching the neighbouring dwelling in the early morning.
The impact on No. 7 would be less, as there is a greater gap between the appeal dwelling and this neighbouring dwelling. However, there is a noticeable level difference between these dwellings, which would increase the proposal’s impact on this neighbour. Its prominent form would be exacerbated by the extent of glazing at first floor, which would be at the east side of the rear facing gable and very apparent to people enjoying the rear garden of No. 7.
The appellants have referred to extensions to other dwellings on the road. I have reviewed these examples. They are quite different to the appeal proposal and do not cause me to come to a different view on this main issue.
In summary, the proposal would harm the living conditions of the occupiers of dwellings to either side of the appeal dwelling. It would not accord with Policy D1 of the East Devon Local Plan 2013 to 2031, which seeks to ensure that development proposals do not adversely affect the amenity of occupiers of adjoining residential properties.
Section 05
Conclusion
For the reasons above, the appeal should 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 77No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 24 November 2021Matches 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
- 3283710
- Application reference
- 21/0795/FUL
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- East Devon District Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000040
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
- 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
- Dismissed
- Decision category
- Dismissed
- Received date
- 27 September 2021
- Valid date
- 27 September 2021
- Start date
- 21 October 2021
- Planning authority decision date
- 6 July 2021
- Appeal decision date
- 24 November 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
- 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
- Horizon
- Dataset status
- Current release
- Catalogue record ID
- 6550
- 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