Appeal 3291628
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 on the application form as ‘loft conversion with front and rear dormer windows’.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Preliminary Matters
The Council have described the development as ‘construction of dormer windows to front and rear’. I note that the appellant has also utilised this description on their appeal form. I consider that this revision provides an accurate description of the proposal and I have therefore determined the appeal on this basis.
Section 04
Main Issue
In the context of the above, the main issue is the effect of the proposed front dormer window on the character and appearance of the host property, the street scene, and the area.
Section 05
Reasons
The appeal property is a two-storey terraced dwelling situated within a predominately residential area. The other properties on the street comprise similar two storey terraced dwellings. None of these dwellings have a dormer window on their front roof slopes. The proposal would introduce a box dormer window to the front roof slope of the appeal property. Consequently, it would represent an incongruous addition to the host property and the street scene thereby having a significant adverse visual impact.
I note that at least one other property on the street has a box dormer on its rear roof slope as I observed on my visit. However, the fact remains that there are no such dormers to the front of any property on the street meaning that the proposal would be at odds with the prevailing pattern of development in the area.
I therefore conclude that the proposed development would materially harm the character and appearance of the host property, the street scene, and the area. Accordingly, it would conflict with the relevant requirements of Policy ENV1 of the [name] of Yorkshire Local Plan Strategy Document.
Section 06
Conclusion
For the reasons set out above I conclude that 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 96No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 25 April 2022Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 30 March 2022 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3291628
- Application reference
- 21/03503/PLF
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- East Riding of Yorkshire Council
- Planning authority code
- E06000011
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
- 32 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
- Dismissed
- Decision category
- Dismissed
- Received date
- 28 January 2022
- Valid date
- 4 February 2022
- Start date
- 15 February 2022
- Planning authority decision date
- 1 December 2021
- Appeal decision date
- 25 April 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
- 14273
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:26
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21