Appeal 3274455
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
the provision of a crossover to the front.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Procedural Matters
The description of the development proposed is taken from the Council’s decision notice. The description of the proposed development is described on the application form as “We would like to drop the kerb outside of our house.”
Section 04
Main Issue
The main issue in this case is the effect of the proposed development on highway safety.
Section 05
Reasons
The appeal property is a two storey mid-terrace dwelling located within in a mixed use area. The area is largely characterised by the presence of two storey terraced housing and retail units with flats above.
The appeal property is located very close to a major traffic-light controlled junction, where [address] meets Hither Green Lane. Whilst the neighbouring dwellings to either side of the appeal property have dropped kerbs providing for short parking areas, dwellings closest to the traffic lights have front gardens only and I observed during my site visit that several dwellings on the opposite side of [address] to the appeal property have a large parking area and share a single point of access onto the road.
During the time of my site visit, I noted that this junction was very busy with vehicular traffic and I also observed numerous pedestrians attempting to cross the junction close to the traffic signals.
The proposed development would require a vehicle to reverse onto or from [address]. It would need to do this across a pavement close to a major road junction. It was clear to me during my site visit that [address] in this vicinity comprises a relatively busy pedestrian and vehicle thoroughfare as pedestrians seek to reach the area’s amenities and road users seek to cross, or turn, at the junction.
Consequently, I find that a vehicle reversing over the pavement outside the appeal property, onto or off [address], would create a significant hazard to road users, regardless of whether traffic is slowing for the junction or not.
I consider that the proposed development would add to the hazards arising from vehicles already making such manoeuvres to either side of the appeal property to the extent that the proposal would place road users at greater risk. 10.Taking all of the above into account, I find that the proposed development would be harmful to highway safety, contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework; to London Plan (2021) Policy T6.1; to Core Strategy1 Policy 14; to Development Management Local Plan2 Policy DM29, which amongst other things, requires development to take account of highway safety.
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
- 29 September 2021Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 14 September 2021 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3274455
- Application reference
- DC/20/119683
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- London Borough of Lewisham
- Planning authority code
- E09000023
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
- 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
- 6 May 2021
- Valid date
- 6 May 2021
- Start date
- 21 July 2021
- Planning authority decision date
- 10 March 2021
- Appeal decision date
- 29 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
- 3967
- 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