Appeal 3272951
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
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 loft conversion project with front elevation refurbishment and external wall insulation.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Procedural Matters
The description of the development proposed is taken from the application form. The decision notice refers to the development proposed as “Loft conversion with one rear dormer and two front dormers. New canopy/porch to front elevation.”
Section 04
Main Issue
The main issue in this case is the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the area.
Section 05
Reasons
The appeal property is a two storey mid-terrace dwelling.
The appeal property is located in a residential area. The area is largely characterised by the presence of terraced and semi-detached two storey dwellings set back from the road behind short gardens and/or parking areas, with longer gardens to the rear.
Along with the set-back of the houses, the presence of a wide pavement with occasional hedge planting provides for a sense of spaciousness. Further, the presence of regular bay features and use of similar materials affords [address] a distinctive and attractive sense of uniformity.
During my site visit, I observed that many dwellings along [address] have been altered and/or extended and that such changes tend to appear in keeping with host properties and the area’s shared characteristics.
The proposed development would introduce front dormers uncharacteristic of [address]. As such, I find that the proposal would draw attention to itself as an incongruous and visually intrusive development, to the detriment of the identified attributes of the area.
The harmful impact of the above would be exacerbated by the proposed removal of the front hipped roof above the appeal property’s bay window feature. This feature provides for visual symmetry with No [address] and its removal would detract from this symmetry and the area’s attractive uniform qualities. 10.Further, the proposed box dormer to the rear would add significant bulk to the overall scale of development proposed and I find that this, together with the proposed fenestration and use of materials, would result in a feature that would add to the incongruity of the proposal as a whole. 11.Taking all of the above into account, I find that the proposed development would harm the character and appearance of the area, contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework; to Local Plan1 policies LP26 and LP30; and to the Council’s Housing Design Supplementary Planning Document (2019), which together amongst other things, seek to protect local character.
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 601No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 17 September 2021Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 17 August 2021 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3272951
- Application reference
- 0294/21
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- London Borough of Redbridge
- Planning authority code
- E09000026
Casework details
The casework, procedure, development and linking details supplied by the official record.
- Casework type
- Householder (HAS)
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development type
- Minor Dwellings
- 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
- 0.019 hectares
- Floor space
- 22 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
- Dismissed
- Decision category
- Dismissed
- Received date
- 12 April 2021
- Valid date
- 12 April 2021
- Start date
- 15 June 2021
- Planning authority decision date
- 11 March 2021
- Appeal decision date
- 17 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
- 3383
- 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