Appeal 3300718
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
described as ‘Conversion of roof space to provide additional habitable accommodation’.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the proposed development upon the character and appearance of the area.
Section 04
Reasons
The proposed development relates to a detached, two-storey dwelling within a modern housing estate. Whilst there is some variation in the style and arrangement of dwellings within this estate, the majority are two storeys high, with limited variation to the main ridge height. Roof gradients are also largely consistent. An exception is that some other properties have front projections with a gable design. These elements appear to have a somewhat steeper roof pitch resulting from a lower eaves height, whilst the ridge line remains consistent. The consistency in ridge height and gradient, provides a uniformity to the roofscape, characterizing the immediate area.
According to the submitted plans, the proposal would raise the ridge height of the main part of the host dwelling by 1.79m. This would be a marked change in the overall ridge height and roof gradient of this dwelling in comparison to other houses in the cul-de-sac. The proposed roof gradient of the main part of the host dwelling would also differ noticeably to the retained roof gradient of its lower height front projections.
The appeal property sits forward of its neighbour, which results in part of the side elevation and the apex of the roof being visible within the street. Seen in context, the proposed increase in height and change in roof gradient would fail to take appropriate account of the form, scale and roofscape of dwellings within the immediate locality, resulting in a scheme that is out of scale with other nearby buildings. It would result in a discordant form of development, that would disrupt the uniformity of the roofscape. The use of matching materials would not be sufficient to address this incongruity.
As such, the proposed development would result in unacceptable harm to the character and appearance of the area, contrary to Policies H8 and UD1 of the Liverpool Local Plan 2013 – 2033, [name] 2022. Amongst other matters, these policies seek to ensure that house extensions complement the style of the dwelling and the surrounding area and take into account aspects such as rooflines and roofscape.
Section 05
Conclusion
The development would not cause any significant harm to the living conditions of occupiers of any nearby residence. However, acceptability in this regard does not address the harm identified in respect to the main issue.
For the reasons outlined above, having had regard to the development plan as a whole and all other material considerations, 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 4077No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 5 August 2022Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 20 July 2022 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3300718
- Application reference
- 22H/0924
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Liverpool City Council
- Planning authority code
- E08000012
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
- 42 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
- 8 June 2022
- Valid date
- 8 June 2022
- Start date
- 24 June 2022
- Planning authority decision date
- 23 May 2022
- Appeal decision date
- 5 August 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
- 18870
- 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