Appeal 3267466
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
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
2 storey rear extension and 1 storey first floor extension to the side elevation.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Main Issue
I consider that the main issue is the effect of the proposal on the living conditions of the occupiers of No 38 [site address] .
Section 04
Reasons
No 38 is located on the corner of [site address] and [address] and whilst it has amenity space to the front and side of the house, wrapping around the two roads, its private amenity space comprises a relatively small garden adjoining No [site address] . There are windows in No 38’s elevation facing the appeal site but due to the extensive vegetation along the boundary, it is difficult to determine what rooms these windows serve.
No [site address] lies to the east of No 38 and No [site address] already affects the amount of sunlight to the garden and elevation facing No [site address] . The proposed two-storey extension to the rear would have some impact but this would be limited due to the orientation of the houses and their position in relation to each other. However, due to the short distance between No 38 and No [site address] I am concerned that extending No [site address] to the rear would increase its bulk and overall massing, very close to the boundary. I consider that this would appear overbearing and add to the sense of enclosure between the properties.
Local Plan Policy DM291 seeks to safeguard the living environments of the occupiers of nearby residential properties by ensuring that development proposals, are not overbearing or result in unacceptable overshadowing, amongst other things. Elements of the proposal would not conflict with this 1 Chelmsford Local Plan, 2013 – 2036, adopted 27 May 2020. policy for example, the side / front extension on the eastern side of the house, but that part of the proposal closest to No 38 would.
I am aware that the existing vegetation between the boundaries of No 38 and [site address] provides a fairly dense screen and itself possibly impacts on the light to the rear of No 38. However, such vegetation can be removed and is less permanent than a building. This does not therefore overcome my concerns.
Other matters have been raised by neighbours including the potential multiple occupancy of No [site address] (reference to a HMO). But that is not a matter subject to this appeal and therefore has no influence over my decision. I have considered all other matters raised but none alter my conclusion.
I conclude that the proposal would have a harmful effect on the living conditions of the occupiers of No 38 [site address] , it would conflict with Local Plan DM29 and therefore the appeal fails.
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 226No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 12 July 2021Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 2 July 2021 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3267466
- Application reference
- 20/01555/FUL
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Chelmsford Borough Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000070
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
- 635 m²
- Number of residences
- 1
- 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
- 22 January 2021
- Valid date
- 4 February 2021
- Start date
- 18 February 2021
- Planning authority decision date
- 10 December 2020
- Appeal decision date
- 12 July 2021
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
- 539
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:25
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21