Skip to main content
Official casework recordAllowedCurrent release

Appeal 3271126

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

7 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

part single part two storey side and rear extension.

  1. Section 02

    Decision

    The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a part single part two storey side and rear extension at [site address] , Southgate, London [postcode] in accordance with the application, 20/5334/HSE, dated 9 November 2020, subject to the Schedule of conditions at the end of this decision.

  2. Section 03

    Main Issue

    The main issue is the effect of the proposed development upon the character and appearance of the host property and the area.

  3. Section 04

    Reasons

    The appeal property is a two-storey semi-detached dwelling located within a residential area. The front has a mock Tudor appearance whereas, the property, to the rear is simpler in appearance and benefits from a two-storey projection and an outbuilding. The appearance of dwellings, along the street, together with the generous spacing between them creates a pleasant suburban environment.

    The proposed first floor extension would extend beyond the side wall of the host property and include a gable roof design. I find that the proposed development would be proportionate to the size of the host property and would not be overly dominant. The extension would reflect the simpler form of the rear of the property and represents a subservient addition through its size, set back and lower ridge line.

    Whilst the proposed window would be wider than the window in the host property, I find that this would not unacceptably harm its appearance given the size of the host property and the proportions and scale of the proposal.

    The proposed development would not unduly harm the character and appearance of the host property or the area. It accords with Policies CS1 and CS5 of the [name] (2012) and Policy DM01 of the Development Management Policies Development Plan Document (2012) which, amongst other things, seek the highest standards of urban design and developments to respect local context and character.

    It would accord with guidance set out in the Council’s Residential Design Guidance Supplementary Planning Document (2016) which, amongst other things, sets out that extensions should be consistent with the form, scale and architectural style of the original building.

  4. Section 05

    Conditions

    I have considered the imposition of conditions in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Planning Practice Guidance. I have imposed a condition specifying the relevant drawings as this provides certainty. A condition requiring matching materials is necessary in the interests of safeguarding the character and appearance of the area.

    Conditions for obscure glazing and restricting additional windows in the side elevation facing No.112 have been imposed in the interests of safeguarding the living conditions of neighbouring occupants.

  5. Section 06

    Conclusion

    For the reasons set out above the appeal succeeds.

  6. Section 07

    Schedule of conditions

    The development hereby permitted shall begin no later than 3 years from the date of this decision.

    The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: [name] 3076/1; [name] 3076/2; [name] 3076/3; [name] 3076/4; [name] 3076/5; [name] 3076/6; Site Plan and Block Plan.

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

    The upper floor window in the side elevation facing [address] shall be non-opening and fitted with obscure glazing prior to occupation and shall then be retained thereafter for the lifetime of the development.

    Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no additional windows or doors shall be inserted in the side elevation of the development hereby permitted facing [address].

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 180No official casework-database value to compare
    Extracted decision date · page 1
    16 September 2021Matches the official casework database
    Extracted site visit dates
    1 September 2021 (page 1)

Reference and authority

Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.

Case reference
3271126
Application reference
20/5334/HSE
Lead case reference
Not recorded
Planning authority
London Borough of Barnet
Planning authority code
E09000003

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
39 m²
Number of residences
0
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
Allowed
Decision category
Allowed
Received date
16 March 2021
Valid date
16 March 2021
Start date
25 May 2021
Planning authority decision date
2 February 2021
Appeal decision date
16 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
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
3306
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