Skip to main content
Rules for YouPlanning, made clearerMenu
Official casework recordDismissedCurrent release

Appeal 3301370

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 works

One-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

the demolition of existing single-storey lobby and erection of a new two-storey side extension and insertion of rear dormer to provide for additional living accommodation.

  1. Section 02

    Decision

    The appeal is dismissed.

  2. Section 03

    Main Issue

    The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area.

  3. Section 04

    Reasons

    The appeal property is a two-storey semi-detached dwelling, which is situated in a prominent position on the corner of [address] and [address]. House types in the vicinity of the appeal property vary in terms of their age, scale and appearance and they include single-storey bungalows, chalet style dwellings and two-storey houses. A number of properties have been altered and extended and dormer roof additions at the front and rear of dwellings are evident along [address] and on neighbouring streets. Some of these dormers appear incongruous in the streetscene and I am not persuaded that they are features that should be repeated.

    The proposal is to demolish an existing small single-storey lobby on the side of the dwelling and construct a two-storey side extension, plus a dormer structure at the rear. The extension would provide an office and utility area on the ground-floor, with bedroom space and en-suite/bathroom areas on the upper floors. The side extension would have a hipped roof and the proposed dormer would cover most of the rear roof area of the original dwelling.

    Policy D1 of the adopted North West Leicestershire Local Plan 2021 (LP) encourages good design. This accords with paragraph 130 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2021 (The Framework), which states that planning decisions should ensure that developments add to the overall quality of the area and are visually attractive.

    The Council states that the proposed extensions would conflict with Policy D1 of the LP, because of its scale and massing adjacent to the side boundary of the site. In addition, the dormer at the rear is considered to be harmful.

    With regard to the side extension, it would be close to the side boundary at the front of the site, but this distance would increase towards the rear. Given the separation distance that would be attained between the building and most of the side boundary, I am not persuaded that the impact on the streetscene would be unacceptably harmful.

    However, whilst dormer additions are not uncommon in the area, I consider that this element of the proposal would be harmful. The structure would be an incongruous and bulky addition to the roof which would be highly prominent in the streetscene when viewed from [address]. The fact that the appeal property sits at a higher level than [address] means that its visual impact and prominence would be increased. Accordingly, I consider that this element of the proposal would conflict with Policy D1 of the LP and with the provisions of The Framework, as referred to above.

  4. Section 05

    Conclusion

    For the reasons given above. It is concluded 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 203No official casework-database value to compare
    Extracted decision date · page 1
    2 September 2022Matches the official casework database
    Extracted site visit dates
    2 August 2022 (page 1)

Reference and authority

Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.

Case reference
3301370
Application reference
21/01560/FUL
Lead case reference
Not recorded
Planning authority
North West Leicestershire District Council
Planning authority code
E07000134

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
39 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
15 June 2022
Valid date
15 June 2022
Start date
2 September 2022
Planning authority decision date
29 April 2022
Appeal decision date
2 September 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
20152
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
Back to appeals databaseRequest a correction or privacy review