Appeal 3312597
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
a 2 storey side extension/annexe to existing dwelling.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area.
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal site comprises a detached dwelling located towards the end of a residential cul-de-sac. Due to the topography of the area, although the appeal property is two-storey, the front elevation to the road is single-storey.
Comprising a two-storey extension adjacent to the existing integral garage and incorporating an annexe, the proposed development would significantly increase the footprint and length of the appeal property. Despite a proposed ridgeline no higher than the existing dwelling and a stepped back front building line, the scale of the proposed extension would dominate the existing property.
As the proposed development would create a long front elevation, uncommon to the surrounding area, it would be an incongruous feature in the street scene. Overall, the proposed development would be of a scale and massing that dominates the existing dwelling and its plot, regardless of the use of matching materials or minimal alterations proposed to the front elevation.
Notwithstanding that there would be limited views of the proposed extension from public vantage points and that the existing tree cover restricts visibility from [address], the rear of the appeal scheme would still be experienced from [address] and the gardens of neighbouring properties.
I conclude that the proposed development would cause unacceptable harm to the character and appearance of the area, contrary to policies DM04 and DM25 of the [name] and Torridge Local Plan 2011-2031 (the Local Plan). These policies, amongst other provisions, support development which is appropriate and sympathetic to the form, scale, setting and design of its surroundings.
Section 05
Other Matters
Even if much of the extension could be constructed under permitted development rights, I have limited substantive evidence demonstrating this, including which elements of the appeal scheme would be permissible. Therefore, I have determined the appeal based on the scheme before me.
[name] note that the Council refer to the scale of the needs of the intended occupants of the annexe in the [name], this requirement of Policy DM25 of the Local Plan was not included on the decision notice as a reason for refusal. [name] am dismissing the appeal on the main issue above, I have not found it necessary to consider this matter any further.
The fact that no objections have been received from neighbouring occupiers specifically concerning living conditions is not a reason, in itself, to permit unacceptable development.
Section 06
Conclusion
The proposed development conflicts with the development plan and there are no other considerations, either individually or in combination, that outweigh this conflict. For the reasons identified above, the appeal is 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 3913No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 23 June 2023Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 7 June 2023 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3312597
- Application reference
- 75606
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- North Devon District Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000043
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
- Not recorded
- 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
- 6 December 2022
- Valid date
- 6 December 2022
- Start date
- 15 May 2023
- Planning authority decision date
- 14 November 2022
- Appeal decision date
- 23 June 2023
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
- 34528
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:27
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21