Appeal 3318568
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
a detached garage.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue in this case is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area.
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal property is a two storey semi-detached dwelling. It is located in a residential area, largely characterised by the presence of two storey detached and semi-detached dwellings.
Dwellings along this side of [address] in this location, including the appeal property, are set well back from the road behind the pavement, grass verges, front boundaries and parking and/or garden areas.
On the opposite side of [address] to the appeal site, houses are set even further back from the road, behind a pavement, a wide area of grassland with street trees, a further road and pavement and front garden/parking areas.
This provides for a notably green, open and spacious environment.
Further to the above, during my site visit, I noted a general absence of buildings in front of the building line along both sides of [address] in this location. This is a factor that contributes to the area’s green, open and spacious qualities.
The appellant is seeking permission for a garage located close to the appeal property’s front boundary. I find that this would introduce a wholly incongruous built-form into an area notable for its absence of any such buildings forward of the building line.
The harm arising from this would be exacerbated due to the siting of the garage in a prominent location, such that it would be widely visible from a range of viewpoints. The proposed development would draw attention to itself as an alien feature, out of keeping with the surrounding area and it would detract from the area’s identified qualities. 10.Taking the above into account, the proposal would harm the character and appearance of the area contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework; to City of Derby Local Plan Review (2006) [name] GD5 and H16; and to Derby City Local Plan - Part 1 [name] (2017) Policy CP3 and CP4, which together amongst other things, seek to protect local character.
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 601No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 4 July 2023Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 12 June 2023 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3318568
- Application reference
- 23/00002/FUL
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Derby City Council
- Planning authority code
- E06000015
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
- 30 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
- 14 March 2023
- Valid date
- 14 March 2023
- Start date
- 11 April 2023
- Planning authority decision date
- 6 February 2023
- Appeal decision date
- 4 July 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
- 35083
- 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