Appeal 3325775
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
9 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 construction of extensions, following the partial demolition of detached dwelling. Construction of replacement annex, without complying with a condition attached to planning permission [name]/21/04805/HOUS, dated 21 July 2022.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the construction of extensions, following the partial demolition of detached dwelling. Construction of replacement annex at [site address] , [name] [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/22/04387/CND, without compliance with condition 2, previously imposed on planning permission [name]/21/04805/HOUS, dated 21 July 2022, and subject to the conditions in the attached schedule:
Section 03
Procedural Matters
The Government published a recently revised National Planning Policy Framework (“the Framework”) and all references to the Framework in this decision relate to the revised document. I am satisfied that no one would be prejudiced by the changes to the national policy context as they are not relevant to the substance of this appeal.
The National Park Authority as Local Planning Authority confirmed that on the decision notice for application [name]/22/04387/CND, the correct plan reference is AS661/712 [name], not AS661/715 [name]. I have considered the appeal on this basis.
Section 04
Background and [name]
The appeal relates to a detached dwelling with annex that at the time of my site visit had been mostly demolished in accordance with the development approved under planning permission [name]/21/04805/HOUS. The appeal proposal is to substitute the originally approved elevations with a different set to allow for the provision of a solid roof lantern light to the dwelling. The main issues are the effect of the proposed roof lantern on the experiential qualities of the landscape in the South Downs National Park (SDNP), with particular regard to dark night skies, relative tranquillity, landscape character and protected species.
Section 05
Reasons
The appeal site lies within an area of the SDNP which is classified as a dark night sky zone1 and is situated within a landscape character area described as having perceptual and experiential qualities, including high levels of perceived naturalness, lack of visible overt human impact, low density of settlement and associated dark night skies. It is situated on a hillside with panoramic views across the surrounding landscape and is mostly experienced from the public footpaths that extend away from [site address] and close to the appeal site. The remoteness of its location and the relative absence of buildings contributes to a sense of naturalness and tranquillity.
The proposed lantern would amount to a relatively small addition to the roof of the substantially sized dwelling in its approved extended form, with a narrow row of glazed panels to its sides and a solid roof. I have been provided with limited substantive evidence to justify why the approved scheme has reached the maximum allowable extent of glazing at the property, such that the proposed roof lantern would reach a tipping point beyond which unacceptable light spill would occur.
Compared to the extent of glazing in the approved scheme, the proposed lantern would increase the overall surface area of glazing by a relatively small amount. Furthermore, the evidence suggests that the extent of glazing in the proposed lantern, together with that in the approved scheme, would be less than in the existing dwelling. As such, the proposal would be likely to reduce light spillage and pollution when compared to the baseline situation.
Although the proposed lantern would occupy an elevated position, it would be raised only modestly above the level of the approved dormers in the south-east and south-west elevations of the dwelling. In views from the nearby footpaths, the proposed lantern would be likely to be partly screened by the main roof of the dwelling, given its roughly central position on the elevated roof, set back from the roof slopes.
Whilst the proposed lantern would be glazed on all sides, I find that in the context of the window openings in the approved scheme, any increase in light spillage and glow from the proposed lantern during the hours of darkness would be very modest, and likely to be reduced when compared to the baseline situation of the existing dwelling. Therefore, it would not be necessary to require the glazing to adhere to any particular specification or be fitted with blinds. 1 [name] E1(a),
For these reasons, the proposal would not have an adverse effect on the intrinsic qualities of the dark night skies in terms of light spill and sky glow, and compared to the baseline situation it would contribute to enhancing the intrinsic qualities of the dark night skies, consistent with the [name] 2, May 2021, titled [name], which seeks to reduce light pollution.
The proposed lantern would be a small, low-profile addition to the roof of the dwelling that would not harmfully interrupt its varied roofscape, which comprises of multiple roof slopes, different eaves and ridge levels, dormers and substantial chimney stacks. The tradition appearance and materials of the proposal would be consistent with the authenticity of the design and appearance of the dwelling in its approved extended form.
Although located close to woodland where bat movement is likely, there is limited evidence before me to indicate that the roof of the dwelling, which would be new, is designed to be a habitat for protected Bat species or that light spill from the proposed lantern would, in the context of the glazing in the approved scheme, otherwise harm bats. The installation of bat boxes on the dwelling at a height of some 3-5m above ground and positioned on a south/south westerly facing aspect, as required by a planning condition, would appear to correspond to the level of the first floor and roof eaves, where there are several windows through which light could spill out. In this context and taking account of the above, I have no substantive evidence that light spillage from the proposed roof lantern would lead to any harm to protected species.
For these reasons, I conclude that the proposed roof lantern would not harm the experiential qualities of the landscape in the SDNP, with particular regard to dark night skies, relative tranquillity, landscape character and protected species. As such, it would be consistent with Policies SD1, SD4, SD5, SD6, SD7, SD8, SD9, SD10 and SD31 of the South Downs Local Plan, [name] 2019 (2014-33), insofar as they seek to ensure that development conserves and enhances landscape character, relative tranquillity, the intrinsic quality of dark night skies and protects priority species.
The proposal would be consistent with the Framework Paragraphs 135, 180 and 182, insofar as decisions should ensure developments are sympathetic to local character including landscape setting, and should conserve and enhance landscape, scenic beauty and wildlife in National Parks.
Section 06
Other Matters
The unsuccessful appeal2 for a replacement dwelling at the site was for a materially different scheme and has limited relevance and weight to the disputed matters and does not alter my conclusions on the main issues.
Section 07
Conditions
In accordance with the Planning Practice Guidance3 and having regard to the main parties’ views, I have restated the undisputed conditions that continue to have effect on the development. 2 APP/Y9507/W/20/3260442 3 Paragraph: 015 [name]: 17a-[phone]
Section 08
Conclusion
For the reasons given above the appeal should be allowed.
Section 09
Schedule of conditions
The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drawings listed under condition 2 of planning permission SDNP/21/04805/HOUS or as substituted by those drawings submitted as part of SDNP/22/04387/CND, namely drawings AS661/705 [name], AS661/707 [name], AS661/712 [name] and AS661/713 [name].
The development shall be carried out in accordance with the plans and details approved under discharge of condition applications SDNP/22/05806/DCOND and SDNP/23/03497/DCOND, unless prior written consent is obtained from the Local Planning Authority to any variation.
Prior to the installation of rainwater goods to the dwelling, extensions and annex hereby permitted, the following shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority: i) Samples and/or technical details of the proposed rainwater goods. ii) Details of the proposed method of fixing the rainwater goods to the building, which shall avoid the use of a fascia board. iii) The proposed position of the downpipes. The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details and retained permanently as such thereafter, unless prior written consent is obtained from the Local Planning Authority to any variation.
No works to repoint the external brickwork or stonework of the elevations to be retained shall be undertaken until: i) Details of the extent of repointing have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority; and ii) A sample panel not less than [address] to show the proposed mortar composition and colour, and the method of pointing, has been prepared on site (in an inconspicuous location), and inspected and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. iii) No powered hand-held tools shall be used when undertaking the repointing works. Where repointing and repair is required, the proposed use of mortar, composition, profile and replacement bricks/tiles/bond shall match the existing in colour, texture and form unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the works shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved details and shall be retained permanently as such, unless prior written consent is obtained from the Local Planning Authority to any variation.
Upon completion of any element of the works to the existing elevations to be retained, any damage caused to the fabric of the building shall be made good to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.
Prior to first occupation of the development hereby permitted, details of external lighting shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The external lighting shall be installed in accordance with the approved details and thereafter retained as such, unless a variation is subsequently submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Prior to the occupation of the host dwelling, extensions and annex, full details of the proposed surface water drainage shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The design should follow the hierarchy of preference for different types of surface water drainage disposal systems, as set out in [name] of the Building Regulations and the [name] produced by CIRIA. Winter groundwater monitoring, to establish the highest annual ground water levels, and winter percolation testing, to BRE 365 or a similar approved method, will be required to support the design of any infiltration drainage. No building shall be occupied until the complete surface water drainage system serving the property has been implemented in accordance with the agreed details.
The details and mitigation methods contained within the [name] dated November 2018 completed by Stark Ecology Ltd, and Bat and [name] dated 8th October 2020 completed by Bright Green Environmental for the development hereby permitted are approved and shall be implemented in full. A Natural England Protected Species Licence will be required for the works, and this will need to be obtained prior to any works taking place. Any works to the trees or vegetation clearance on the site should only be undertaken outside of the bird breeding season which takes place between 1st March - 1st October. If works are required within this time an ecologist will need to check the site before any works take place (within 24 hours of any work). A check will also be required for birds' nests within the building prior to work commencing. If nesting birds are found, works in the area will need to be avoided and the nest protected until after the young have fledged.
Before the development hereby permitted is brought into use the following habitat enhancements shall be installed/erected within the site: i) Bat boxes shall be installed on the building on site facing south/south westerly positioned 3-5m above ground. ii) In addition bird boxes shall be installed on the building and/or trees within the garden of the dwelling. Once installed the habitat enhancements shall thereafter be left in perpetuity. Appropriate designs can be found in the publication "Designing for Biodiversity: A technical guide for new and existing buildings".
The development hereby permitted shall be undertaken in accordance with the [name] submitted 4th November 2021. Those features indicated within the statement to be installed on the site shall be erected/installed prior to the occupation of the development hereby permitted and retained thereafter.
The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until details/elevations/location of refuse and recycling storage, cycling storage and electric vehicle charging points have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved facilities shall be implemented prior to the occupation of the development and thereafter retained unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
The annex hereby permitted shall be used solely for purposes ancillary to the occupation and enjoyment of the dwelling known as Copyhold and shall not be used or occupied separately or severed thereafter.
Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no development within Part 1, Schedule 2, [name], B, C, D and E shall be carried out other than expressly approved by this permission.
Notwithstanding the provisions of Part 2, Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no gates, fences, walls or other means of enclosure shall be erected at the site, other than expressly approved by this permission.
Notwithstanding the provisions of Schedule 2, Part 6 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no building or chattel to be used for purposes defined in Section 336 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 shall be erected/placed at the site, unless permission is granted by the Local Planning Authority pursuant to an application for the purpose. End of Schedule
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 3654No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 24 April 2024Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 16 February 2024 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3325775
- Application reference
- SDNP/22/04387/CND
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- South Downs
- Planning authority code
- E26000010
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
- 2. Refused permission to vary or remove a condition(s)
- Appeal reason
- Appeal Against Conditions
- 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
- 2 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
- Allowed
- Decision category
- Allowed
- Received date
- 11 July 2023
- Valid date
- 11 July 2023
- Start date
- 18 October 2023
- Planning authority decision date
- 24 May 2023
- Appeal decision date
- 24 April 2024
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
- 49987
- 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