Skip to main content
Official casework recordAllowedCurrent release

Appeal 3271064

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

5 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 rear single storey orangery.

  1. Section 02

    Decision

    The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a rear single storey orangery at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 20/03224/FUL, dated 9 December 2020, subject to the following conditions:

    The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision.

    The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plan Ref. 19QUEENSPLAN688.

    The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match those of the existing dwelling.

  2. Section 03

    Main Issue

    The main issue in this case is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and the surrounding area.

  3. Section 04

    Reasons

    The appeal relates to a large detached dwelling. It sits within a suburban road which is home to dwellings of a variety of sizes and designs; many of which have been extended and altered extensively.

    The appeal dwelling has recently been the subject of a two storey extension across the full width of its rear elevation. The proposal seeks to add an orangery across about two thirds of the extended rear elevation, which would www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate project a further 3 metres. According to the Council’s calculations, this would see the cumulative depth of the rear extensions project some 9 metres from the original rear elevation.

    From what I can deduce, the original dwelling was reasonably large, sitting within a deep plot. The existing two storey addition projects beyond the main rear elevations of the detached dwellings located either side. However, the proposed orangery would not project significantly beyond the single storey rear section of the nearest neighbouring dwelling, No. [address]. Against this context, I am satisfied that the proposed orangery would not appear overly large or out of context, even when considered cumulatively alongside the two storey addition.

    In this particular situation, I conclude that the proposed orangery would not harm the character and appearance of the host dwelling or that of the surrounding area. In such terms, there is no conflict with the overall aims of policy CS01 of the adopted [name], policies H9 and ENV39 of the adopted Bexley Council Unitary Development Plan or the Council’s Design and Development Control Guidelines Note 2 (Extensions to Houses) which collectively promote high quality design that reflects and, where possible, enhances, its context and does not amount to over-development.

  4. Section 05

    Conditions

    In addition to the standard conditions which limit the lifespan of the planning permission and direct that the development takes place in accordance with the approved plans, the Council has suggested a condition to ensure the external finishing materials of the extension match those of the host dwelling. I agree that such a condition is necessary to ensure a visually acceptable development. In allowing the appeal, I shall impose these conditions.

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 831No official casework-database value to compare
    Extracted decision date · page 1
    27 September 2021Matches the official casework database
    Extracted site visit dates
    15 July 2021 (page 1)

Reference and authority

Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.

Case reference
3271064
Application reference
20/03224/FUL
Lead case reference
Not recorded
Planning authority
London Borough of Bexley
Planning authority code
E09000004

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
No
Affects setting of a listed building
No
Historic building grant made
No
Relates to a conservation area
No
Flooding is an issue
No
Site within an AONB
No
Site within an SSSI
No

Decision and dates

The published outcome and every imported case date.

Official decision
Allowed
Decision category
Allowed
Received date
15 March 2021
Valid date
15 March 2021
Start date
13 May 2021
Planning authority decision date
4 February 2021
Appeal decision date
27 September 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
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
Horizon
Dataset status
Current release
Catalogue record ID
3780
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