Appeal 3273890
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
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
addition of one floor above original ground floor.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Preliminary Matters
I have taken the description of development from the application form. Although different to that on the decision notice, no confirmation that the change was agreed has been provided.
The provisions of Schedule 2, Part 1, Class AA of the GPDO do not require regard to be had to the development plan. However, I have had regard to the policies of the development plan and the National Planning Policy Framework (Framework), only in so far as they are relevant to the subject matters of the prior approval.
Following the refusal of the application the new Framework has been published. There have been no fundamental changes to national planning policy relevant to the main issues in this appeal and so no injustice has been caused to any of the appeal parties.
Section 04
[name]
The main issues of the appeal are: • whether the proposal would be permitted development under Schedule 2, Part 1, Class AA of the GPDO; and • if so, the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the dwellinghouse.
Section 05
Whether Permitted Development
Schedule 2, Part 1, Class AA of the GPDO enables, as permitted development, the enlargement of a dwellinghouse by the construction of additional storeys. This is subject to a number of criteria listed in paragraph AA.1, and various conditions listed in paragraphs AA.2 (2) and (3).
[name].1 (h) states that such development is not permitted where the floor to ceiling height of any additional storey, measured internally, would exceed the lower of: (i) 3 metres, or, (ii) the floor to ceiling height, measured internally, of any storey of the principal part of the existing dwellinghouse.
While the application form indicates that the proposal would comply with this requirement, there are no sections or other plans showing the internal ceiling height of the existing dwelling or the additional storey.
[name].3 (3) states that the local planning authority may refuse an application where, in its opinion the developer has provided insufficient information to enable the authority to establish whether the proposed development complies with any conditions, limitations or restrictions specified in paragraphs AA.1 and AA.2
The information provided fails to satisfactorily demonstrate that the proposal would meet the requirements of [name].1 (h) and therefore it is not permitted development.
Section 06
Character and Appearance
As the proposal would not be permitted development there is no need for me to consider the prior approval matter of the external appearance of the dwelling.
Section 07
Conclusion
For the above reason, I conclude that, based on the evidence before me, the proposal would not be permitted under the requirements of Schedule 2, Part 1, Class AA of the GPDO.
The appeal is, therefore, 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 151No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 9 September 2021Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 7 September 2021 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3273890
- Application reference
- 8692/APP/2020/4101
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- London Borough of Hillingdon
- Planning authority code
- E09000017
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
- 3. Refused prior approval of permitted development rights
- 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
- 96 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
- 27 April 2021
- Valid date
- 27 April 2021
- Start date
- 13 August 2021
- Planning authority decision date
- 3 February 2021
- Appeal decision date
- 9 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
- 2924
- 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