Appeal 3312808
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
4 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
[address]
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the property and the local landscape.
Section 04
Reasons
[address] is a 1.5 storey house with a range of outbuildings, in a countryside location surrounded by fields. The proposal is to build a 1.5 storey building as guest accommodation, sited towards the end of the extensive garden area.
Although the proposal would have a smaller footprint than the house, it would be significantly taller so that it would have the appearance of a second main building at the property. It would be well away from the house and next to a much lower storage building, consolidating and extending the spread of development in this comparatively remote location.
The site is set well back from [address] and views from the lane are partially screened by roadside hedges and trees. There are no other significant public views of the property. The height and siting of the proposed building would nevertheless harmfully intensify development here, creating a significantly larger cluster of buildings as seen from the lane.
The appellant suggests that the proposal adopts an innovative and sustainable approach through the use of solar panels. The solar panels would make a welcome contribution towards fighting climate change, but do not represent innovative design. The proposed siting is in the location of a previously existing farm building, which apparently was demolished some 30 years ago. This is not a sound justification for a new building of this scale in this location. I note that another 1.5 storey outbuilding has been permitted and built in a more prominent roadside location at [address] nearby. I do not know the full details of that case, however, and assess this appeal proposal on its own merits.
There are a few other factors that weigh in favour of the proposal. Suffolk Coastal Local Plan (LP) policy SCLP5.13 supports the provision of ancillary accommodation like this in general terms. Sibton Parish Council recommends approval. Like East Suffolk Council, I find no objections to other aspects of the proposed design, which would use traditional proportions and materials.
Taking all of this into account, however, I conclude that due to its siting and height the proposal would unacceptably harm the character and appearance of the local landscape. It therefore conflicts with the aims of LP policies SCLP5.13 and SCLP11.11, to secure high quality, locally distinctive design that has no significant adverse effect on the landscape.
For the reasons set out above, and having regard to all other matters raised, I conclude that the appeal should not succeed.
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 890No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 28 March 2023Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 28 February 2023 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3312808
- Application reference
- DC/22/1474/FUL
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- East Suffolk
- Planning authority code
- E07000244
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
- 8 December 2022
- Valid date
- 8 December 2022
- Start date
- 23 December 2022
- Planning authority decision date
- 4 October 2022
- Appeal decision date
- 28 March 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
- 30396
- 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