Appeal 3349742
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 and single storey front extension/porch.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for proposed 2 storey side extension and single storey front extension/porch at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, reference ZB24/00746/FUL, subject to the following conditions:
The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision.
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with drawing nos: • Proposed floor plans 2232-002D, • Proposed elevations 2232-003D, • Existing and proposed block 2232-004, and • Existing and proposed roof plan 2232-006.
The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall be those stated on the planning application form.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue in determination of the appeal is the effect the proposed development would have on the character of the host property and surrounding area.
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal site consists of a large two-storey white painted, rendered dwelling with pitched pantile roof set within a very spacious and mature landscaped plot. The dwelling has a conservatory and single storey lean-to garage and there are a mix of outbuildings nearby. The surrounding area is rural in nature, and it is remote from neighbouring properties. Public views of the site are largely limited with most being from the public road that skirts around the outer edge of the plot.
The proposal would remove the existing conservatory and garage and add a two-storey end extension and a single storey extension/porch. The extensions would be constructed in zinc cladding and roofing, and the two-storey extension’s eave and ridge would match the height and general pitch of the adjacent section of the host property’s roof. The extensions’ window fenestrations would typically be narrower and more elongated in design compared to those on the host property.
The proposed two-storey extension would be a large addition. However, due to its end positioning and 90-degree orientation to the host property, views of its size and scale would be broken by the existing building and the nearby large outbuilding. The proposed extension/porch element would be a modest addition due to its single storey size and limited extent. As such the proposed extensions would not be disproportionate or overly dominate to the host property and they would appear as subservient additions. The resultant building would also sit comfortably within the large plot and would not be highly visible in the surrounding area.
By virtue of its design and external materials, the proposal would have a more contemporary architecture form compared to the more traditional host property. However, this clear distinction would retain and, with the removal of the conservatory and garage, enhance the host property’s limited architectural merits. The proposal’s design and different external materials would not appear unsympathetic, overly bulky or be an incongruous addition.
Reference is made to the proposal being contrary to the Hambleton Local Development Framework’s Domestic Extensions Supplementary Planning Document December 2009 (SPD). However, while the proposal may not meet all the design guidance set out in the SPD, it would acceptably maintain the character of the host building and the local context and street scene. It would not overly dominate the host property, would maintain the spaciousness of the existing street scene, and would not cause a terracing effect or overcrowding appearance. Due to its isolated nature, privacy and daylight to neighbouring properties would also not be a concern. The proposal would therefore meet the five key design principles the design guide sets out to protect including character and appearance and living conditions of neighbouring occupants.
The proposal would not adversely affect the character of the host property and the surrounding area. It would not be contrary to Policies E1 and S5 of the Hambleton Local Plan February 2022 which seek, amongst other matters, for new development to be of a high-quality that recognises the intrinsic beauty, character and distinctiveness of the countryside and integrates successfully within its surroundings in terms of form and function.
Section 05
Conditions
The Council has not suggested any planning conditions. However, planning conditions are required.
In the interests of certainty, a time limit condition for completing the development and a condition to ensure it is completed in accordance with the approved plans are required. To protect the character and appearance of the area, a condition is required to ensure the proposed building’s external materials accord to the application form and the details shown on the drawings.
Section 06
Conclusion
For the reasons detailed above, and having had regard to other matters raised, the appeal should be allowed.
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 2190No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 6 January 2025Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 19 November 2024 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3349742
- Application reference
- ZB24/00746/FUL
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- North Yorkshire Council
- Planning authority code
- Not recorded
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
- Allowed
- Decision category
- Allowed
- Received date
- 8 August 2024
- Valid date
- 13 August 2024
- Start date
- 20 August 2024
- Planning authority decision date
- 10 June 2024
- Appeal decision date
- 6 January 2025
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
- 62436
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:25
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:28
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:25
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21