Skip to main content
Official casework recordDismissedCurrent release

Appeal 6000719

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 works

One-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

alterations to roof to allow for creation of first floor.

  1. Section 02

    Decision

    The appeal is dismissed.

  2. Section 03

    Main Issue

    The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area, with particular regard to the East Devon National Landscape.

  3. Section 04

    Reasons

    The Orchard is a small cul-de-sac of four bungalows. It is set within a woodland setting on the edge of a small village, at an elevated position. The bungalows have pitched roofs, with gable ends that address the roadway. The dwellings are relatively uniform in design, two of which have small dormer windows within their roof slope. The wider village consists of housing of various styles and scales, with no uniform design. The appeal dwelling, of relatively simple design, makes a neutral contribution to the character and appearance of the area.

    The proposed extensions would consist of two large dormer window features that would be located on each side of the roof slope. These would occupy most of the roof slopes, with only small sections of the original roof being retained. These would add considerable mass to the building, resulting in flat roof elements that would be of a similar height to the ridge line. This would result in the appearance of a flat roofed two-storey building which would fundamentally alter the simple and traditional form of the existing dwelling. Consequently, the extended dwelling would be a discordant feature within its context of otherwise similar single-storey properties.

    The proposal would not be sensitive to the style of the existing dwelling, nor would it reflect existing design features, contrary to the advice of the [site address] Village Design Statement. Furthermore, the addition of two small windows within the apex of the gable wall would appear out of scale and constrained by the adjacent roof edge, reflecting poor design. Whilst revised cladding has been offered by the appellants, which could be secured by condition, this would not reduce the overall scale or harm caused by the proposal.

    The site is within the East Devon National Landscape. Strategy 46 of the East Devon Local Plan [2016](LP) establishes that great weight should be given to conserving and enhancing their natural beauty for development that would affect National Landscapes. The appeal site is located along a private driveway. Nonetheless, views of the roof of the dwelling can be obtained from local roads, in some views and from the entrance to the Orchard. Although no long-distance or open countryside views of the scheme would be possible, the proposed extension would be partially visible in wider views of the site conveying some, albeit modest, harm to the National Landscape despite its screened position.

    My attention has been drawn to several extensions either built, or subject to planning approval, for dwellings within the village. Nonetheless, whilst contributing to the varied character of designs found locally, they have a limited bearing on the effect of the proposal on its site and immediate context.

    Also, my attention has been drawn to the approved scheme at ‘[name] where the Council identified that the site was hidden from views outside the site. The details of this scheme are partly shown at appendix 4, of the appellant’s Statement, consisting of elevations and a photo montage. This relates to the erection of a new dwelling of contemporary design, being two-storey with a flat roof, that was deemed by the Council to complement the character and appearance of the area. As such, its relationship to the public realm and the contribution it would make to the area presents materially different characteristics to the proposed development.

    Appendix 5, of the appellant’s statement, shows examples of approved dormer windows on homes close to the site. However, these are subservient on the roof slope and therefore do not demonstrate a precedent for the proposal.

    Accordingly, the proposed development would harm the character and appearance of the area and would fail to conserve the landscape and scenic beauty of the East Devon National Landscape. Consequently, the proposal would conflict with LP policy D1 and Strategy 46 of the LP and the [site address] Village Design Statement. These require, among other matters, for the scale and mass of development to relate well to its context and to conserve and enhance the landscape character of the area.

    The appellant asserts that the proposed creation of additional living space would allow a young family to remain on site and remain in the village. This is stated as an economic, social and well-being benefit to the area. However, this are benefits of limited weight. I also note the support offered by the Town Council, but this does not alter my findings.

    For the above reasons the appeal is dismissed.

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 390No official casework-database value to compare
    Extracted decision date · page 1
    21 January 2026Matches the official casework database
    Extracted site visit dates
    6 January 2026 (page 1)

Reference and authority

Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.

Case reference
6000719
Application reference
25/0606/FUL
Lead case reference
Not recorded
Planning authority
East Devon District Council
Planning authority code
E07000040

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
Not recorded
Appeal reason
refused
Type detail
Householder
Jurisdiction
No Jurisdiction Associated
Link status
Not recorded

Site and development

Published appeal-site measurements and planning designations, without the withheld precise location fields.

Site area
0 hectares
Floor space
67 m²
Number of residences
Not recorded
Site in Green Belt
No
Agricultural holding
Not recorded
Affects setting of a listed building
Yes
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
15 September 2025
Valid date
15 September 2025
Start date
17 September 2025
Planning authority decision date
3 September 2025
Appeal decision date
21 January 2026

Case administration

Published recovery, call-in, costs and enforcement information for this case.

Redetermined
Not recorded
Bespoke
Not recorded
Date recovered
Not recorded
Date not recovered or derecovered
Not recorded
Call-in date
Not recorded
Costs applied for
No
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
Back Office
Dataset status
Current release
Catalogue record ID
83090
First seen
20 August 2026 at 14:25
Last seen
20 August 2026 at 16:29
Removed from release
Not recorded
Record created
20 August 2026 at 14:25
Record updated
24 August 2026 at 16:21