Appeal 6002156
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
8 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 addition of a two storey front extension.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Appeal Procedure
The site visit was undertaken by a representative of the Inspector whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal.
Section 04
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area.
Section 05
Reasons for the Recommendation
The appeal site is a semi-detached property situated on a residential cul-de-sac. Properties on [address] are generally pairs of semi-detached dwellings, some with single storey lean to porches but of almost symmetrical and largely original appearances creating a pleasant sense of uniformity. The same matching design features, which often includes one first floor gable per unit, can be seen on [address] with groups of terraced properties. The consistency of building form in the area contributes positively to its character and appearance.
Although the extension would be constructed using matching materials with a similar pitched gable front, its two-storey nature would be an incongruous feature that would introduce a prominent block to the front of the property. Its forward projection would be a dominant addition that would unacceptably disrupt the otherwise consistent design across the street scene and wider estate. Furthermore, the extension would unbalance the symmetry between the properties.
The proposal would therefore cause harm to the character and appearance of the area and would be contrary to Policies 41 and 42 of the Doncaster Local Plan 2021 which are concerned with proposals responding positively to their context amongst other things.
Section 06
Other Matters
Some of the properties may have had alterations carried out but I did not witness any substantial alterations in the immediate area other than single storey small extensions. That being said, and other than porches and the odd conservatory, even small extensions are the exception rather than the norm in this location and I am therefore not led to recommending that the appeal is allowed in their light. A lack of objection from neighbouring occupiers does not absolve me from making an assessment as to the appeal scheme’s impact in regard to the main issue. The absence of any views made or matter which would be acceptable in the scheme would be a lack of harm and thus neutral in any balance of considerations.
Section 07
Conclusion and Recommendation
For the reasons given above, the appeal scheme would conflict with the development plan and material considerations do not indicate a decision other than in accordance therewith. I therefore recommend that the appeal should be dismissed.
Section 08
Inspector’s Decision
I have considered all the submitted evidence and my representative’s report and on that basis 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 1895No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 13 February 2026Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 3 February 2026 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 6002156
- Application reference
- 25/01974/FUL
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council
- Planning authority code
- E08000017
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
- 176 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
- 2 December 2025
- Valid date
- 2 December 2025
- Start date
- 17 December 2025
- Planning authority decision date
- 4 November 2025
- Appeal decision date
- 13 February 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
- 84391
- 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