Appeal 3333150
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
No verified development description has been extracted from an official decision PDF yet.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Preliminary Matters
Since the appeal was submitted, a revised version of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) has been published. The main parties were given the opportunity to comment on any relevant implications for the appeal.
Section 04
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the proposed front dormer windows on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and surrounding area.
Section 05
Reasons
No 3 is a semi-detached bungalow situated in a small cul-de-sac accessed from [address]. The cul-de-sac is characterised by semi-detached bungalows with no alterations to the front roof slope. Thus, the principal elevations of the bungalows have retained their original character, appearance, and design. Watkinson road is characterised by two-storey semi-detached dwellings. Front dormers are also not a feature of dwellings located on [address].
The proposed pitched front dormers would be out of character with the existing bungalow and neighbouring dwellings as they are not a feature within the street scene. The dormers would not be small or retain the original roof form and would interrupt the simplicity of the principal elevation of the bungalow. Furthermore, they would not maintain the symmetry of the pair of semi-detached bungalows. Consequently, the front dormers would be an incongruous addition and would not respect or enhance the character and appearance of the host dwelling or the surrounding area.
My attention has been drawn to numerous dormer windows in the locality. However, dormer windows to the front elevation do not form part of the character and appearance of the bungalows in [address] and are not a common feature in the street scene. Therefore, the context of the appeal site, as well as the character and appearance of the host dwelling, cannot be directly compared to the examples highlighted.
For these reasons, the proposed front dormer windows would cause harm to the character and appearance of the host dwelling and surrounding area. Consequently, the proposal would conflict with Policy BT1 of the Calderdale Local Plan (2023) which states, amongst other things, that the design style proposed in new developments should respect or enhance the character and appearance of existing buildings and surroundings, taking account of its local context and distinctiveness. It would also conflict with chapter 12 of the Framework which seeks to create high quality and beautiful places, and ensure developments are sympathetic to local character.
Section 06
Conclusion
For the reasons given above, having considered the development plan as a whole, the approach in the Framework, and all other material considerations, the appeal does 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 603No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 23 January 2024Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 15 January 2024 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3333150
- Application reference
- 22/01152/HSE
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council
- Planning authority code
- E08000033
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
- 72 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 November 2023
- Valid date
- 14 November 2023
- Start date
- 28 November 2023
- Planning authority decision date
- 25 August 2023
- Appeal decision date
- 23 January 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
- 45227
- 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